IGF 2020 Reports

IGF 2020 BPF Cybersecurity

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:51
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What trends and commonalities can be identified between different international agreements and initiatives on cybersecurity?, To what extent do international agreements and initiatives on cybersecurity include one or more of the 11 norms contained in the 2015 Report of the UN Global Group of Experts (adopted under UN GA Resolution A/RES/70/237)?, What can cybersecurity policymaking learn from normative principles in global governance?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Looking at norms developed in other fields can provide useful lessons for better development, implementation and respecting of norms in the area of cybersecurity. 

The development and implementation of norms should include both policy / diplomatic professionals as well as technical experts.

Norms development should be open and inclusive in order to include developing countries and stakeholders.

 



 

3. Key Takeaways

Even if not binding themselves, norms can play an important role in helping to interpret and implement binding aspects of international law. Norms matter for cybersecurity because the internet is a decentralized, multinational entity that is hard to govern. Internet governance therefore relies on multistakeholderism, which forms the basis for norms. There are useful lessons to learn from norms developments in other areas:

  • Successful norms are concrete, specific, and often create processes to foster implementation and accountability
  • Powerful norm promoters can be critical for success, as can be incentives and persuasion
  • Failures happen and are inevitable but can become the basis for success
  • Norms development, even without results, creates socialization, which can be critical for further success

While norms are often developed via multilateral diplomacy and state-driven efforts, there is an important role for non-state actors from private sector and civil society, providing expert input into both the substance of the norms as well as how they can be implemented. It is also important to involve technical experts, both in the development of norms (to avoid creating unintended negative consequences on the technical operation of the Internet), and to bring technical and policy professionals together to work on implementation of norms.

There are challenges in both developing norms that have wide support and then subsequently in having them implemented. Guidelines can be helpful in supporting implementation of norms. 

There are also concerns that cybersecurity norms development processes are not always open and inclusive to all countries and stakeholders.

The work of the BPF has been valuable in tracing norms and finding commonalities, even where there are differences in language and terminology.

 



 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

1. Introduction to the work of the BPF in 2020

Maarten Van Horenbeeck, FIRST

Sheetal Kumar, Global Partners Digital

 

2. Norms development in cyber vs. the real world 

Apratim Vidyarthi, University of Pennsylvania Law School

Anastasiya Kazakova, Kaspersky

 

3. Analysis of new cybersecurity agreements

John Hering, Microsoft

 

4. Discussion

Moliehi Makumane, Government of South Africa

Pablo Hinojosa, APNIC

Sherif Hashem, SUNY Polytechnic Institute

Louise-Marie Hurel, Igarapé Institute

Isaac Morales, Government of Mexico

Stéphane Duguin, CyberPeace Institute



 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:

Full details of the BPF’s work this year can be found at the BPF’s webpage - https://www.intgovforum.org/content/bpf-cybersecurity. These include: 

  • What Cybersecurity Policymaking Can Learn from Normative Principles in Global Governance  -  Background document (download .pdf)

The Internet Governance Forum’s thematic intersessional work on cybersecurity intends to guide submissions to the 2020 Best Practice Forum on Cybersecurity’s final, annual report. By taking the time to identify successful norms initiatives and their role in policy change, the BPF Cybersecurity grounds its analysis of a wide variety of Cyber Norms initiatives in the lessons learned throughout the stages from early development to implementation. The examples studied in this review were chosen for their effectiveness and are not necessarily related to or even tangential to technology or the internet. By looking to successful norms frameworks the BPF Cybersecurity, and the initiatives it has invested in, might better understand the strengths, flaws, and why some norms initiatives have ultimately succeeded. 

  • Exploring Best Practices in Relation to International Cybersecurity Agreements - draft Research paper (download .pdf)

The IGF 2020 Best Practice Forum (BPF) on Cybersecurity’s workstream on exploring best practices in relation to international cybersecurity agreements is focused on updating and further advancing the analysis of the 2019 BPF report on the state of international cybersecurity agreements, with a more narrow focus on cyber norms agreements. Its work includes:

  • Identifying new agreements and developments since last year to include in the analysis.
  • Reviewing and refining the scope of agreements to be included in the report.
  • Identifying a core group of agreements to include in the 2020 analysis.
  • Identifying trends and commonalities between contents of cyber norms agreements.
  • Releasing a call for contributions to gain further input on these selected agreements and their implementation.
  • Updating last year’s research paper with new learnings about implementation regarding these core agreements.

 

  • Identifying additional international agreements and initiatives on cybersecurity, and performing a deeper analysis of a set of agreements  -  Call for contributions 

In 2020, the BPF Cybersecurity is building on its 2019 report by focusing on identifying additional international agreements and initiatives on cybersecurity, and performing a deeper analysis of a narrower set of agreements. In this deeper analysis, we’re looking specifically at whether the agreement includes any of the UN-GGE consensus norms; and whether any additional norms are specifically called out.

The narrower set of agreements is focused on those that are specifically normative, rather than having directly enforceable commitments.  The Best Practice Forum on Cybersecurity is calling for input for its 2020 effort. Input will feed into the BPF discussions, the BPF workshop during the virtual IGF2020 and this year’s BPF output report.

 



 

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 BPF Data and New Technologies in an Internet Context

Updated: Mon, 09/08/2021 - 09:47
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. What are current challenges and concerns re. the collection and use of users’ data and what best practices exist to ensure that data is used to bring benefit and not to harm?, 2. Are views and concerns changing and is there a need for new mental models and mindsets?, 3. What is the way forward and what is the role of Internet Governance and the IGF?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Ms Concettina Cassa welcomed participants and explained the purpose of the IGF Best Practice Forums, and specified that the IGF 2020 BPF Data and New Technologies in an Internet Context focussed on best practices related to the collection and use of users’ data by new technologies that contribute to ensure that the data is used to provide benefit and not to harm users.

Mr Wim Degezelle presented the Data and New Technologies Issues Card developed by the BPF as a tool to structure stakeholder discussions on the topic. 

Ms Emanuela Girardi introduced the case studies submitted to the BPF: Ms Verónica Arroyo presented the ‘Dos and don’ts for COVID-19 tracing apps’ developed by AcessNow for lawmakers and governments.  Mr. Ricardo Chavarriaga shared the experiences of the CLAIRE COVID-19 TaskForce. Mr. Cathal McDermott focussed on Microsoft’s privacy principles related to the collection of data to tackle COVID-19.

Mr Michael Nelson led a panel discussion on concepts and mindsets and their impact on policy discussions.The roundtable discussion involving all session participants reflected on some frequently used buzzwords and catchphrases, such as ‘cyberspace’, ‘data governance’ ‘ethical artificial intelligence’, ‘data sovereignty’, ‘data is the new oil’, etc. and discussed if they limited, better defined or replaced by new concepts.

The session ended with a discussion, led by Ms. Concettina Cassa, on where in the institutional and Internet governance landscape is a suitable place for policy discussions related to the use of data and new technologies, and how could be avoided that too many talks and processes exist in parallel.

3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Ms Concettina Casa, MAG BPF Facilitator ( AGID - Agenzia per l’Italia Digitale )

Ms Emanuela Girardi, BPF Co-facilitator ( Pop AI )

Mr Michael R. Nelson, Senior Fellow and Director, Technology and International Affairs, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Mr Ricardo Chavarriaga,  Senior Scientist at Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW) and Coordinator of CLAIRE AI & COVID-19 Task Force.

Mr Cathal McDermott, Senior Legal Counsel, Microsoft

Ms Verónica Arroyo, Policy Associate - Latin America, AccessNow

Mr Wim Degezelle, Consultant IGF Secretariat 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:

The final BPF output document will be published one the BPF's webpage after the IGF meeting:

https://www.intgovforum.org/content/best-practice-forum-on-data-and-new-technologies-in-an-internet-context 

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 BPF Gender and Access

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:45
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The session tackled the subject of gender at the IGF with a thematic focus on violence, harm, pleasure, and consent. Results from the report put together by the BPF were shared, along with the survey methodology. Overall, the findings show that gender issues tend to be discussed mostly in conjunction with the issue of access and there is a lack of disaggregated data for gender-diverse participants. There was also broad discussion on approaching gender and consent issues online with more positive framing to foster empowerment and focus on subjects such as pleasure. Lastly, speakers and participants also discussed whether a feminist discussion should be included or delineated from the gender and access discourse.

A recurring issue that was raised during the session is the continued silos of various gender subjects at the IGF. Speakers in the session stressed the need to involve more discussions on solutions to gender issues from a policy level in order to make progress on the subject matter. Repeated various speakers also brought up the matter of expanding beyond the UN and the IGF to reaching out to broader communities to instigate lasting change and empower women and gender diverse people. In terms of data, there is overall consensus that more needs to be collected and better disaggregated.

3. Key Takeaways

The session underlined the need to distinguish between gender representation and empowered participation. Although women participants and speakers at the IGF have seen a rise over the past few years, there is still more work to be done in regards to agency. Women and gender-diverse individuals need to be encouraged to actively participate and bring forth specific discussions at the IGF; their participation should not be tokenised, nor should it stop at a simple contribution to a session. Proactive efforts to collect more data is required. Going forward, it would be worthwhile to bring forth more discussions on pleasure and consent from a gender diversity perspective. There is also strong recommendation that the IGF make a conscious effort to include regional and local expertise on gender into this policy space.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session was about gender at the IGF and in other policy spaces, therefore gender issues were the focus.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 BPF Local Content

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:52
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
  • There is an urgent need to empower and encourage users (end-users or professional organisations or institutions) to develop digital content in local and indigenous languages, especially those at the risk of disappearing.
  • Efforts like the WIPO discussion on a potential treaty on the protection of local traditions and UNESCO’s Internet universality and indigenous language indicators have to be encouraged and promoted. The same has to be done with the development of national and regional policies to support entrepreneurial activities based on local expression.
  • Multistakeholder and international cooperation is essential in raising awareness about the need to promote multilingualism online, but also in mobilising resources (human, financial, institutional, etc) to support the availability of local languages and local content online and to lower barriers to access minorities and indigenous languages.
  • Joint and sustained efforts are needed to empower indigenous people and local communities to digitise their own cultural heritage and manage the associated IP rights.
  • Governments, the private sector and non-profit entities should work together to encourage and support communities and individuals to be content producers themselves and ensure that their languages are present on the Internet. Such support could range from stipends to tech equipment and free Internet access. Libraries and schools could play a pivotal role in this effort.
  • Broadcasters and newspapers in local languages need to be supported in their digitalisation efforts (which is a must, if they want to be where the audiences are), because they can help local communities to bridge the digital divide and be connected through what they have most precious: their identity and roots.
  • The production and distribution of local and indigenous content in digital forms should be encouraged, and this should be done while ensuring respect for intellectual property rights.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not discussed.

8. Session Outputs:

See the takeaways section above and the BPF report.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 #Netgov and news media sustainability in the times of crisis

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:52
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How has COVID-19 impacted the journalism and news media sector, and what is the role of Internet governance in potentially alleviating it? , How does digital platform policy impact the sustainability of journalism and news media?, What are the major technical and economic challenges facing journalists, and how can changes to digital policy via multi-stakeholder governance create a more sustainable environment for journalism and news media?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • There was broad support for the view that problems of media sustainability are interconnected with the ecosystem of Internet governance.
  • It was agreed that sustainable funding and business models for media must be achieved together with different stakeholders within the IGF ecosystem.
  • Legal obligations and policy regulation were seen as needed in order to guarantee data protection, non-violation of human rights, and access to independent media.
3. Key Takeaways
  • More transparency for content regulation on Internet platforms regarding sensitive content of human rights activists, journalists, and critical voices across markets and states.
  • Robust tech policies are needed to guarantee independent journalism and access to information, while there needs to be greater consideration and respect for smaller markets by technology platforms.
  • The COVID-19 pandemic reveals what was evident even before: Global Internet governance has a direct and significant impact on media sustainability.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Tanja Maksic, BIRN Serbia, female

Fiona Nzingo, RNW, Love Matters Kenya Social Media Director, female

Ellery Biddle, Ranking Digital Rights, female 

Olaf Steenfadt, Reporters Without Borders, male

Michael J. Oghia, Global Forum for Media Development, male

Mira Milosevic, GFMD, female

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

It was mentioned that content removal from social media platforms can have negative gender implications especially in the context of online campaigns for health and sexual reproduction issues.

9. Group Photo
Dc s
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Accessibility - Closing the Gap

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:42
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Increased participation by persons with disability in IGF policy discussions., The role of standards and guidelines in improving accessibility., Methods of raising awareness of persons with disability as a major stake-holder to embed accessibility in policy development.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Paulina Lewandowska
  • Petra Rezar
  • Muhammad Shabbir Awan
  • Peter Crosbie
  • Judy Okite
  • Shadi Abou-Zahra
  • Judith Hellerstein
  • Gunela Astbrink
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session did not directly discuss gender issues. However, there was a gender balance in all the discussions.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Community Networks at Times of Crises and Pandemics

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:03
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
the importance of Internet access and connectivity , Creation of a new definition for connectivity called Meaningful connectivity and meaningful access. Also creating a way of measuring how this goal is met or can be met. , the relevance of community networks as a credible strategy to expand access, empowering people, and increasing connectivity.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad support/agreement:

  • Alternative models of providing connectivity are necessary.
  • Community Networks are an efficient alternative to typical models of connectivity, especially for rural or neglected areas.
  • COVID19 has accentuated the importance of connectivity for the full enjoyment of personality and citizenship rights. The pandemic is a harsh reminder that without internet connection, people are estranged from opportunities and services. Half of the world still experiences this disconnect, because of a lack of infrastructure and appropriate policies.
  • Internet access is a basic right and a public good.
  • Community Networks require specific public policies in order to be feasible.
  • “Meaningful connectivity” requires more than the simple capacity to access the internet sporadically, under limited infrastructural and technical conditions or with a reduced scope.
  • When freeing up more spectrum or implementing spectrum sharing schemes, regulators should allow for the implementation of Community Networks.

Areas of no agreement/areas needing further discussion and development:

  • Talking about providing “access” to the internet fits into a conceptual framework that allows for disparities in the real capabilities of internet connectivity. This is due to the fact that “access” may refer to access to concentrated information silos. This means that it is also necessary to de-concentrate the internet, and Community Networks are an efficient way to do so, because they create little “portions” of the Internet connected to the greater whole - the way the Internet was actually meant to be.
  • There are context-specific characteristics to meaningful connectivity. For example, the choice of device - a smartphone or a desktop computer, for example - may significantly change from one context to another based on privacy considerations.

 

3. Key Takeaways
  1. “Meaningful connectivity” is a new concept of connectivity based on four minimum technical thresholds: 1. at least 4G equivalent mobile broadband connection; 2. at a minimum, access to a smart device; 3. a fixed wired or wireless connection at home; and 4. that people can use the internet whenever they need, not sporadically. The Alliance for Affordable Internet is putting together guidelines on how to implement this concept of meaningful connectivity and how to measure the progress toward its realization in practice.
  2. Community Networks are not seen as rogue initiatives anymore. There have been various successful implementations which have demonstrated their potential and sustainability.
  3. Community Networks help in dealing with crises such as the COVID19 pandemic because they are more agile than traditional networks. They have been applied to bring communities information on COVID19 with significant success.
  4. Access to the internet should be framed from a human rights point of view. It is instrumental to the right of access to information, which is particularly relevant in the context of a pandemic. In this context, too, access to data is fundamental and should be included in the scope of the right of access to information. Non-state actors should also comply with human rights legal instruments, given their horizontal effect.
  5. Regulators should look to innovative spectrum regulations as a means to bridge the digital divide. When implementing spectrum regulations, the interests of the end-user should be taken into account and the preferable approach would be that which increases the variety of providers, especially by allowing Community Network arrangements.

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Sonia Jorge, Alliance for Affordable Internet A4AI

Osama Manzar, DEF

Jane Coffin, ISOC

Rolf H. Weber, University of Zurich

Cynthia El Khoury, APC

Senka Hadzic, CyberBRICS / Research ICT Africa

Nicholas Echaniz, AlterMundi

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

We need a renewed focus on Gender and women empowerment and what can be done to make them feel safe.

8. Session Outputs:

The Value of Internet Openness in Times of Crisis

This volume explores “The Value of Internet Openness in Times of Crisis” and is the official outcome of the Coalitions on Net Neutrality and on Community Connectivity of the United Nations Internet Governance Forum. This work stems from the consideration that the COVID-19 pandemic has harshly highlighted the fundamental importance of Internet access, and the total exclusion that the unconnected face in times of crises. Internet connectivity, has now emerged as the backbone of all social, political and economic interactions along with services during the Covid-19 pandemic. The current crisis brings to light that digital infrastructures play an essential role, shaping our development. The sustainability of such development relies on Internet openness and this book offers an ample range of perspectives exploring why it is more crucial than ever to guarantee that the Internet stays a smooth-running, open, and accessible common good.

THE AUTHORS OF THIS BOOK ARE (IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE): Vint Cerf, Sébastien Soriano, Luca Belli, Osama Manzar, Sarah Farooqui, Dhanaraj Thakur, Teddy Woodhouse, Sonia Jorge, Frode Sørensen, Apar Gupta, Sidharth Deb, Smriti Parsheera, Rolf H. Weber, Senka Hadzic, Pablo Aguera, Alison Gillwald, Alejandro Pisanty, LocNet Team, Carlos Baca, Erik Huerta, Karla Velasco, Anna Orlova, Andrey Shcherbovich, Daniela Parra, Amali De Silva-Mitchell, Nikhil Pahwa, and Anriette Esterhuysen.

9. Group Photo
dc3 session
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Equitable access to digital content: lessons from COVID-19

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:54
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What emergency measures have been taken by various stakeholders to support access to information, digital content and services during the pandemic?, How do existing policy frameworks (ICT and broadband, intellectual property, library, etc) impact access to information, digital content and services at the peak of the pandemic, and in the eventual recovery?, What policy changes and practical measures can support access to information and key content and services in the phases of response and recovery - as well as future crises?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The session discussed key perspectives and dimensions of access to content and information, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes connectivity infrastructure and capacities of libraries and similar facilities which help deliver this access, digitisation and digital content delivery and access models, and relevant Intellectual Property policy frameworks.

There was a broad agreement among the panelists that access to key content is an high priority, especially since the demand and need for it has grown rapidly. Taking measures that help ensure equitable digital inclusion and access to content and information is therefore crucial.

The panelists discussed policy frameworks and practices that can help support public access and digial inclusion through public access, and emergency measures that have been taken by various stakeholders (governments, libraries and library organisations, NGOs and publishers) to ensure access to key content during the pandemic.

3. Key Takeaways

The session defined several key policy issues around access to content and information during the pandemic and future recovery, and suggested several ways equitable access can be expanded:

1) Access to key content, especially during the pandemic, is integral to sustaining and supporting education, employment, health, citizen participation.

2) Expanding the rollout of connectivity infrastructure and capacity-building for libraries and similar facilities helps ensure equitable access to content for the public.

3) Innovative and emerging solutions and practices also offer valuable models for supporting equitable access to content and, more broadly, digital inclusion. This includes, for example, using bands of spectrum open for public use (i.e. TV White Space) for broadening connectivity, offline internet and controlled digital lending.

4) It is also important to ensure that existing Intellectual Property frameworks and mechanisms offer a supportive policy environment that helps ensure equitable access to key content. One example of a key issue here is e-book and textbook pricing and access models.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Nkem Osuigwe, African Library & Information Associations & Institutions

Don Means, Gigabit Libraries Network

Mark Graham, Director, the Wayback Machine at the Internet Archive

Teresa Hackett, Electronic Information for Libraries

Valensiya Dresvyannikova, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions

Moderator: Stuart Hamilton, Head of Libraries Development, Local Government Management Agency, Ireland

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:

The draft DC-PAL report discussed during the session - "Public access in libraries: achievements and insights from broadband policy implementation" - https://www.ifla.org/digital-plans

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Fostering a new key role of Youth in Internet Governance

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:59
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Should Youth be considered as a Separate Stakeholder Group? , What are the current challenges with regards to effective youth participation in Internet Governance?, How to tackle these challenges?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

* Areas of broad support/ agreement: - Discussed the different entry points for youth to join the IG spaces by sharing the journeys of the panelists and agreed that there are no specific steps to follow. 

- The difficulty of being noticed as youth and new comers in virtual conferences and the limited possibility on networking. 

- The difficulty of keeping youth involved in the IG spaces after participating in a youth program or receiving a fellowship and maintain a sustainable and meaningful participation.

- Young activists could sometimes prioritize issue from their personal views without checking the youth priorities. 

- Youth inputs are not taken seriously during discussions and they are not invited to panels.

- The  youth participation is not well-shaped as the voices of youth are not organized

* Areas of no agreement: - A Debate on whether or not Youth should have their own Stakeholder Group.

- Youth Programs and fellowships don't have an effective approach 

3. Key Takeaways

1. More leadership positions for youth in different stakeholder groups and capacity building opportunities not simply being in the room.

2. Ensuring sustainable and meaningful youth participation as newcomers may find the space not so intuitive and hard to stick around.

3. Solidarity and working together to understand the youth priorities and coordinating efforts to tackle these issues and have unified messages.

4- Initiate a dialogue with the different Stakeholder groups and be open for collaboration to have our voices heard.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

1- Eileen Berenice Cejas, Argentina, YCIG/Youth Observatory (Civil Society)

2- Emilia Zalewska, Poland, , LegalTech Polska (Civil Society)

3 - Mohammad Atif, India, Youth SIG (Civil Society)

4- Joao Pedro Martins, Portugal, Lusophone Youth IGF, (Civil Society)

5- Lily Edinam Botsyoe, Ghana , Ghyrate Ghana (Private Sector) 

 6-Augusto Marturin, Argentina,  Youth IGF Argentina Technical Community (Technical)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session reflected on youth issues without specifying a gender and panelists gave examples on advocacy in the LGBTQ Community

8. Session Outputs:

The participants drafted their answers collaboratively to the policy questions in a Risepad and their answers were considered in this report as part of the recommendations.

The discussions points including recommendations and debate points will be added to the YCIG final report and shared with the new 2021 Steering Committee members as action items to build on next year. It will be also recommended to the new Steering Committee to continue and increase the engagement of the YCIG with other DCs and other Youth initiatives and organizations especially for the preparation of 2021 IGF and the Youth IGF Summit in Poland.

A blogpost with the summary of the session will be shared on the YCIG webiste (https://ycigweb.wordpress.com/)

9. Group Photo
ycig_pic
10. Voluntary Commitment

-Inspire people to do more, involve people so they know what's happening and know how to contribute and impact so that we have this going forward
-Strengthening and enhancing the engagement of Stakeholders especially youth and disadvantged stakeholders for future IG mechanisims and deliverables particularly those from developing countries
-The promise of sticking around and keeping involved in the regional level but also trying to seek a more unified approach with getting involved with different institutions to conenct the dots
-Creating opportunities for all youth to be part of the conversation
-Encouraging diversity to have as many  as possible points of views hear and creating Networking opportunities next year as it is the best part of the IGF

IGF 2020 Future Unclear: data and bodies in the post-pandemic times

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:05
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can we place the concept of ‘privacy as boundary management’ at the centre of conversations about data — boundary management allows us to control what we share with others, and is crucial to live a life of dignity., What happens with the personal data that is collected by apps, especially when users’ consent is not informed or meaningful, and what are the gendered implications around this?, What kind of feminist values can we use to build the future of technology, and how can we use imagination as a tool for political change?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

1. Summary of Gender Report Cards (IGF 2019)

2. Data, privacy and boundary management

Speaker Dr. Anja Kovacs highlights in her essay highlights the concept of 'privacy as boundary management' as being central to whether and how we share our data, what happens with our data, what information about ourselves do we want to share or not share, etc. However, the concept of boundary management doesn’t reflect much in traditional conversations about privacy. In most dominant discourses, data is treated as a resource - separate from the medium that generates it. This has severe implications on a person's agency, privacy and rights. Boundary management is not only important because it allows us to control what we share with others but this control is crucial to living a life of dignity.

3. Gendered implications of data collection by apps

In her essay, Sadaf Khan reflects on menstrual apps, how they track data, and the gendered implications around it. People’s consent to data collection by apps is often not informed consent - they are not fully aware that the apps are ‘authorised’ to share their information, comment and stories. What do these apps do with the data? Who handles the data? Who has access to it? How is it used? For how long is it stored?

4. Feminist values for building transfeminist futures

As Joana Varon reflects in her essay, what would the future look like if algorithms that command our daily interactions were developed based on feminist values? What if the technologies we cherish were developed to crash, instead of maintain, the matrix of domination of capitalism, hetero-patriarchy, white supremacy, and colonisation? How can we build technologies based on feminist notions of consent? How can we use feminist frameworks and values to question, imagine and design tech?

3. Key Takeaways

Placing consent at the centre of the conversations around data. Data policies must consider consent & privacy not individualistic matters but collective matters. Policies must take into account economic structures that impact how tech is designed & marketed to men & women, impacting power dynamics.

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speakers:

Dr. Anja Kovacs, Internet Democracy Project, India

Joana Varon, Coding Rights, Brazil

Sadaf Khan, Media Matters for Democracy, Pakistan

Moderator:

Bishakha Datta, Point of View, India

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session directly engaged with gender, focusing on issues such as the gendered implications of data collection by technology, algorithmic biases impacting marginalised genders, the feminist principles of consent, etc.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Inaugural meeting, Dynamic Coalition on Data and Trust

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:07
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How did the domain Industry respond to the Covid-19 pandemic?
Covid-19 trends in social media, and self regulatory responses.
Covid-19 a perspective from the EURid Youth Committee on the dynamic coalition. , Covid-19 misinformation in the web environment., What regulatory interventions have been successful in limiting the spread of Covid-19 misinformation online?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • Covid-19
  • Misinformation
  • Regulatory interventions to limit the spread of misinformation online 
  • Industry approaches to limiting the spread of misinformation online
  • Data leakage and data breaches associated with covid-19 data
  • Covid-19 related DNS abuse
  • Existing procedures for sharing information on DNS abuse in crisis situations
  • Measures taken by registrars to prevent the Spread of Covid-19 related misinformation
  • Need for continued dialogue between community of registrars
  • Movement of offline problems online
  • Closing the digital divide
  • Messaging services and online platforms as critical infrastructure
  • Importance of encryption 
  • Encryption ‘backdoors’
  • Partnerships between tech companies and health authorities (International and domestic)
  • Search engine optimisation and the spread of misinformation
  • Third party links and misinformation
  • How platforms are helping spread misinformation 
  • Advertising and misinformation
  • Cybersecurity risks generated by working from home 
  • EU Code of Practice on Disinformation
  • 1 Year review of EU Code of practice on Disinformation
3. Key Takeaways
  • A number of domain name registries and registrars have been actively working to limit the spread of misinformation during covid-19
  • EURid and Tucows reported that the quantity of new domain names registered during covid creating a risk of harm by spreading misinformation was relatively minimal (<1%).
  • There is a need for reliable information to be shared between registrars regarding DNS abuse during crises. 
  • Partnerships between tech companies and public institutions (international and domestic) have been crucial to stemming the flow of misinformation during Covid-19
  • Misinformation is not only spread by hostile actors, it can be spread by 
  • It is not just any sort of hostile actors that are spreading false information,  different culprits such as algorithms and big data enabled tools that are optimized for junk news are also to blame.  We have alternative media outlets that are doing very well over these social media algorithms and that are also having economic incentives.There is also a mainstream problem with misinformation.  During the politics of post truth, political leadership both in authoritarian regimes, but also in democracies, is disseminating all sorts of conspiratorial or deceiving information.
  • Traditional techniques for professional search engine optimisation are also being employed to spread misinformation such as boosting domain authority, backlinking, and markup and advertising.
  • The EU Code of Practice on Disinformation has led to tangible progress in the major platforms approach to addressing disinformation, but this has been limited by the scope of the code and the fact that it only applies within the EU and to the major tech companies.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Giovanni Seppia, EURid

Pablo Bello, WhatsApp

Lisa-Maria Neudert, Oxford Internet Institute

Antoan Shoratov, EURid Youth Committee

Alberto Rabbachin, European Commission

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Internet in Crisis Management and Renewal

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:57
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Is there any stress on Core Internet Values during the crisis? Would there be a greater realization on the significance of these values post-crisis?, On another dimension, to what extent did the stakeholders make productive use of the Internet during the crisis? , To what extent could the Internet positively bring together the right actors to design reconstruction and renewal?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

What can we do, how do we use the Internet to foster collaboration in our response to COVID-19? There
is good collaboration in the search for vaccine against the COVID-19 disease, but in other spheres, for
e.g, in using the Internet in the educational setting yet, the tools are not quite right, teachers don't have
the training, the students, they're often uncooperative or outright, you know, misbehaving. We have a
lot of work to do to learn to adapt this technology in a way that makes it more useful. COVID and this
pandemic, it is a gamechanger. The adaptability and the inventiveness of this generation instils hope.
The potentials are enormous.Technical expertise is needed to sort of keep the options open, free and
open source, affordable, apps that don't force you to upgrade your equipment, because of age-old,
decade-old rivalries between large corporates, that's a thing coordinates from the technical expertise
that is brought to the table, it is really important to hear this from the technical experts and formative
influencers and and how the infrastructure operates. It is a resilient infrastructure on the whole. In the
context of increasing traffic, some solutions were identified, that of bringing content closer to
consumers, by global content providers, that of optimizing traffic roles and creating conditions for rapid
expansions of bandwidth. There are cultural aspects as well and due to the COVID crisis there is an
increased need for us to be online, not only as individuals but as communities or as Classes, groups.
There are different ways of using these portals and devices.

3. Key Takeaways

The Internet is not to be blamed for every evil. In reference to
Internet’s design principles, online behavior could be mapped to offline behaviour. This brought up the
observation that permissionless innovation needs to be tempered, so that we can do something about
harmful behaviors. The Internet is distance erasing, the Internet permits these harms to occur at a
distance. It creates juxtaposition, where there would not be juxtaposition in the real world, but it
creates juxtaposition in the online world, we need to figure out how we apply law enforcement, or other
kinds of norms, in a very different environment than the real world. However, we have to use human
solutions to solve human problems. The technology won't solve them for us.

Previous debates on Core Internet Values included observations that the core Internet values should not
be harmed. But during the pandemic some of these core values, including freedom of expression are
due to perceived necessity.
The pertinent question was: Such compromises occur during Covid as regulatory measures, how
temporary or how do these regulatory measures?
Another observation was that a new central layer, a center of control, must never be created, and it
appears that during this pandemic, there is a certain degree of regulatory control as being put in place
and that also should be temporary.
The Dynamic Coalition, in 2015, proposed that there be a defined, agreed upon list of core Internet
values, and these core Internet values, they need to be the reference standard for global Internet policy.
It was observed that the “Internet Invariants” as listed by the Internet Society are pertinent to Core
Internet Values, and there has been much discussion on this topic as well.
 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender Issues did not get addressed in this session.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Launch of DC Internet Standards, Security & Safety (DC-ISSS)

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:12
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
WG Security by design - Internet of things: What are current best practices? To detect divergence in national policy and provide advice on global harmonisation. Identify barriers for deployment of best practices and provide policy to overcome these barriers. To identify IoT attack and threat vectors. To create a best practice proposal on IoT-legacy., WG Education and Skills: Examine whether current education curricula include Internet security, safety, governance and architecture and provide a best practice policy for ICT education programmes. Bring together experts with the aim of establishing collaboration. Agreement on how to disseminate and promote the outcomes of the WG, taking into account national and regional differences. Provision of guidance for vocational training programs, e.g. relating to procurement decisions and deployment generally of Internet standards and ICT best practices., WG Procurement, supply chain management and business case: Prepare practical guidance on incorporating relevant security standards in procurement objectives. Compile best practice guidelines to support purchasers to make better decisions. Promote a framework to increase consistency amongst national public sector purchasers and regulators. Resolve gaps in knowledge on security standards on the national level. Advocate inclusion of security-based procurement in government digitalization strategies. Consider liability regimes with penalties to strengthen compliance with security standards recommendations. Establish a continuous role for the IGF as multi-stakeholder observatory to monitor and review security standards deployment.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Before this DC-ISSS launching workshop several preparatory meetings have taken place to decide on the most urgent topics to start work on. These were presented in the day 0 workshop #19 'Let's Work!' and the comments made have been taken into account. This launch was used to present on the urgency of deploying security related Internet standards and ICT best practices in general, after which the working program and main policy questions were presented. All the debates had taken place in the previous sessions. The work programme of the DC-ISSS is seen as ambitious but has full agreement on the three identified Working Groups and the identified topics and questions within the Working Groups, as presented above here.

3. Key Takeaways

1) The main recommendations considering the slow deployment of Internet standards and ICT best practices have been identified and agreed upon. Participants in the DC have turned then into specific topics and a workplan that addresses: a) the steps towards the identification of current best practices; b) the ambition to present policy recommendations.

2) There is broad stakeholder support and participation for the three workplans, that in the coming year are expanded to absent stakeholders.

3) The work starts in the last week of November.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Wout de Natris

Jonas Grätz - Hoffmann

Olaf Kolkman

Raymond Onuoha

Ghislain de Salins

Mark Carvell

Yurii Kargapolov

Janice Richardson

Alejandro Pisanty

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Short report: The DC-ISSS was successfully launched in this session. Gender issues were not a topic in the DC. Differences on the national and regional level have been mentioned and taken into account. Due to cancelation, declining the invitation to speak and the offered speakers, gender balance unfortunately has not been reached.

 

8. Session Outputs:

Report IGF 2020 Launch of DC Internet Standards, Security & Safety (DC-ISSS)

Friday, 6 November, 2020 - 09:10 to 10:40 UTC

DC-ISSS leadership:

  • Wout de Natris
  • Mark Carvell
  • Marten Porte

 

This session marks the official launch of the Dynamic Coalition on Internet Standards, Safety and Security (DC-ISSS). Wout de Natris, Chair of the DC, presented the goals of the event and of the DC at large: make policy recommendations and connect both existing stakeholders and new stakeholders. A picture was painted on the status quo of the implementation of Internet standards and the reasons that have led to this. For this, the connection was made to the report that came out of the 2019 IGF pilot project on Internet standards deployment, which investigated both causes and possible solutions of slow standards deployment, of which three were selected, by the DC-ISSS participants, for the initial work of the Dynamic Coalition:

 

  1. Security by Design - sub-group IoT security;
  2. Education and skills;
  3. Procurement, supply chain management and the creation of a business case.

 

Following the introduction, four experts gave a short presentation on the importance of a safer internet and the deployment of security standards.

 

Jonas Grätz-HoffmannOffice of the Special Envoy for Cyber Foreign and Security Policy, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, Switzerland – spoke about the importance of digital governance for the Swiss Government. He also warned of the fragmentation of global rules and standards and the Internet as a whole. He stressed that the Dynamic Coalition could become a key milestone in strengthening the IGF in new ways in terms of creating concrete, actionable outcomes.

 

Olaf Kolkman - Principal, Internet Technology, Policy and Advocacy, Internet Society – spoke about positive examples of standard deployment and the reasons behind them. Based on a book by Everett Rogers, ‘Diffusion of Innovations’, he explained that the deployment of innovations generally goes through five stages:

  1. Knowledge/awareness is necessary;
  2. The innovation needs to seem useful to the potential user;
  3. Decision will be made on deployment;
  4. Implementation phase;
  5. Confirmation that the innovation works and you keep using it.

 

For the persuasion phase, five factors are at play:

  1. Relative advantage;
  2. Complexity;
  3. Compatibility;
  4. Try-ability (without breaking the system);
  5. Observability.

Security standards have serious issues on all these five factors. The relative advantage is often missing, especially for first movers. We see deployment especially lacking when complexity is high. Also new standards are often inherently incompatible with other standards. On top of that, big challenges exist with being able to try new standards and observing that a standard has been implemented. Initiatives should focus on improving these five factors.

 

Raymond Onuoha – Associate Member, African ICT Foundation – showed the challenges that exist in standards deployment in an African context. One report showed the importance of network security as a shared responsibility. Therefore, initiatives exist to avoid duplication of efforts and to bridge capacity deficits. Furthermore, the necessity of capacity building was stressed, which can be considered by Working Group 2 of the DC-ISSS. Lastly, he highlighted that national governments are key actors for promoting best practices and facilitate information sharing.

 

Ghislain de Salins – Digital Security Policy, OECD – gave a presentation on IoT security by design. He explained the work being done in the OECD and the importance of IoT security. Also, the different stages in which vulnerabilities can appear, such as in the microprocessors, meaning that a once secure product is not necessarily secure forever. Also, an issue with IoT products is legacy products, or products that are no longer updated by the manufacturer. One of the issues is the misalignment of market incentives. The OECD designed a policy tool kit which goes from raising awareness to liability legislation.

 

Presenting the DC-ISSS

In the following part of the session Mark Carvell recounted the road taken from the pilot project around the IGF in Berlin to the current session. He stressed the commitment to sustain the momentum, including a series of individual stakeholder consultations on key issues and priorities for the first phase of taking the work further under the auspices of the IGF and thus bring the topic of deployment to a next level. The goal is to use the IGF framework to deliver tangible policy outcomes.

The themes of the three DC-ISSS Working Groups were then presented:

WG1: Security by Design: Sub-group 1 - Internet of Things

Yurii Kargapolov – Chair of IoT Special Interest Group, Internet Society – laid out the proposed work for the working group on Internet of Things. He stressed the importance of protecting websites against the most common vulnerabilities and of enhancing the trustworthiness of platforms. It will also be important to avoid duplication of other IoT-related initiatives. The first aim of the working group will be creating guidelines of best practices. Secondly, the working group will aim to identify current barriers to deployment and how to overcome these barriers. Another topic that was touched upon was the disclosure of vulnerabilities which is necessary for safe IoT-devices.

 

Participants asked if there will be more working groups on security by design. These are foreseen and can be activated by request or when it is necessary to do so.

 

WG2: Education and Skills

Janice Richardson – International Advisor, Insight S.A. Luxembourg – presented the goals for the second working group on education and skills. She stressed the importance of including Internet security in education and skills programmes. She explained that some of the information or communication technology courses, e.g. at university and the vocational level, currently do not include digital security, which is problematic. The working group will identify best practices. In addition, the security of online learning platforms is important, but might be addressed in another working group. In conclusion, she believes that educational curricula should include greater coverage of Internet security, safety, governance, and architecture depending on the level. Rather than working on public awareness, the working group aims to reach relevant organisations such as ministries of education and universities. Other outreach options were also discussed.

 

WG3: Procurement, Supply Chain Management and the Business Case

Alejandro Pisanty – Universidad Nacional Autonomico de Mexico (UNAM) – illustrated the difficulty of having many competing standards. He explained that many rules are being created but often not followed up on. This working group on procurement, supply chain management and business case will look at how the normative role of the government can be used to increase deployment of standards. The purchasing power of the state and large corporations should be put to good use to include these standards in their purchasing requirements. One of the goals will be to create a comprehensive practical guide on incorporating relevant and optimal security standards in procurements, including SMEs. Also, knowledge gaps and inconsistencies between countries should be bridged. Best practices are to be shared by the participants, as well as bad practices from the past.

 

Closing remarks

The three remaining themes, a) regulation, b) human rights and consumer protection, and c) responsible disclosure of vulnerabilities will start at a later phase of the project, as soon as it is opportune to do so. This is the same for other sub-themes in WG1 on Security by design, e.g. for websites, platforms, data storage, software, etc.

 

The Chair concluded the session by thanking all speakers and inviting everyone who is interested to join and share their knowledge and ideas. It was also requested that people who are interested in chairing one of the working groups get in touch with the leadership.

 

Furthermore, the need for funding to actively support the work within and progress of this Dynamic Coalition is stressed by the Chair. He concluded by highlighting the progress that has been made on this topic within the IGF framework. Now the real work on content will start. A special thanks goes out to the Swiss Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs for its support in making the launch of the DC possible.

 

The working groups will meet on Tuesday 24 November (WG1), Wednesday 25 November (WG2) and Friday 27 November (WG3), all at 12.00 UTC. More information and the link to sign up to the mailing list can be found here.

 

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

All three WGs are filled with experts, from around the globe and all stakeholder groups, who have expressed their willingness to contribute. (See the DC-ISSS mailing list.) Since the launch the group has grown further.

IGF 2020 Lessons learned from the Pandemic: child rights and safety

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:50
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Lessons Learnt from Evidence-Based Research

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:44
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Net Neutrality at times of Covid19

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:56
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
From a net neutrality perspective, what is the value of internet openness at times of crisis? How does it contribute to the enjoyment of fundamental rights?, What are the political and economic determinants of internet access?, What are the caveats of the current definition of internet access, internet openness and net neutrality?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad support/agreement:

  • COVID-19 has significantly increased internet usage and connectivity demand. More than ever, people need the internet to stay connected to their professional, social and cultural environments.
  • The current connectivity infrastructure has successfully dealt with the sudden increase in traffic load, without major breakdowns in connectivity worldwide. The problem is lack of access more than traffic load.
  • End-user's rights must be safeguarded and Net neutrality rules are key.
  • Net neutrality is an essential element of Internet Openness but to preserve openness more must be done e.g. the coalition should consider working on Interoperability and on device neutrality.

 

3. Key Takeaways
  • Exceptional connectivity measures taken by ISPs should still be in accordance with net neutrality and an open internet. Examples in various jurisdictions indicate the pathways to the implementation of these measures without offending users’ rights or restricting Internet openness. Some examples also reveal the issues with policy choices that do not carefully observe these standards.
  • Internet shutdowns and surveillance measures taken without adequate safeguards represent a concrete menace to the freedom of speech and expression. Net neutrality plays a central part in providing internet openness and realizing such fundamental rights.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Luca Belli, FGV

Anriette Esterhuysen, MAG Chair

Frode Sorensen, Norwegian Telecoms Regulator (Nkom)

Aurore Tual, French Telecoms Regulator (ARCEP)

KS Park, Korea University Law School/Open Net

Smriti Parsheera, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy in New Delhi

Apar Gupta, Internet Freedom Foundation

Anya Orlova, CyberBRICS

Andrey Shcherbovich, Higher School of Economics, Moscow

Alejandro Pisanty, Autonomous University Mexico

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:

The Value of Internet Openness in Times of Crisis

This volume explores “The Value of Internet Openness in Times of Crisis” and is the official outcome of the Coalitions on Net Neutrality and on Community Connectivity of the United Nations Internet Governance Forum. This work stems from the consideration that the COVID-19 pandemic has harshly highlighted the fundamental importance of Internet access, and the total exclusion that the unconnected face in times of crises. Internet connectivity, has now emerged as the backbone of all social, political and economic interactions along with services during the Covid-19 pandemic. The current crisis brings to light that digital infrastructures play an essential role, shaping our development. The sustainability of such development relies on Internet openness and this book offers an ample range of perspectives exploring why it is more crucial than ever to guarantee that the Internet stays a smooth-running, open, and accessible common good.

THE AUTHORS OF THIS BOOK ARE (IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE): Vint Cerf, Sébastien Soriano, Luca Belli, Osama Manzar, Sarah Farooqui, Dhanaraj Thakur, Teddy Woodhouse, Sonia Jorge, Frode Sørensen, Apar Gupta, Sidharth Deb, Smriti Parsheera, Rolf H. Weber, Senka Hadzic, Pablo Aguera, Alison Gillwald, Alejandro Pisanty, LocNet Team, Carlos Baca, Erik Huerta, Karla Velasco, Anna Orlova, Andrey Shcherbovich, Daniela Parra, Amali De Silva-Mitchell, Nikhil Pahwa, and Anriette Esterhuysen.

The volume is also available in ebook here https://online.fliphtml5.com/gnel/fsbp/#p=1  

 

9. Group Photo
net_neutrality_igf
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Platform Regulations: Towards A Common Vocabulary

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:58
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
● What are the main concepts within the platforms' governance debate?

, ● Which are the key internet governance issues nowadays and the most effective remedies?
, ● What is the best governance model, taking into account existing laws, enforcement, self-regulation and other institutions?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • - Areas of broad support/agreement:

  • Platform governance: may mean how platforms govern societies or how societies govern platforms. It may also include the platforms' technological architectures and design.
  • When it comes to Artificial Intelligence and Facial Recognition, the social risk of these technologies is increased. The design of the system must encompass different views in order to avoid blind spots in this sense. We need to look at accountability of a system, not only explainability - understand how the system was put together.
  • Terrorist content is more than cyberterrorism. Fear-inducing information and extremist discourse are characteristics of the concept, which makes it a difficult distinction from hate speech, but a very important distinction.
  •  Areas of no agreement/areas needing further discussion and development
  • How to manage private and public order when it comes to content moderation online?
  • Methodological challenges and choices of the authors when writing the entries and defining the concepts on the Glossary - which is still in its draft version and open for modifications until december.
3. Key Takeaways

The aim of the session was to bring together experts from different fields. A common vocabulary may unite specialized conversations on platform governance that have been going on. In this sense, the fundamental goal of the Glossary on Platforms Law and Policy is to provide different readings and to inform decision-makers in their activities.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Julie Owono, Oversight Board (Facebook)

Lofred Madzou, World Economic Forum 

Richard Wingfield, Global Partners Digital

Rossana Ducato, University of Aberdeen and UC Louvain 

Catalina Goanta, Maastricht University  

Rolf H. Weber, University of Zurich 

Chris Marsden, University of Sussex

Giovanni De Gregorio, Milano Bicocca University

Paddy Leerseen, University of Amsterdam

Enguerrand Marique, UC Louvain & University of Radboud-Nijmegen

Yasmin Curzi, FGV

Ivar Hartmann, FGV

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Women were well represented at the table and there were remarks about gender issues regarding platform governance.

8. Session Outputs:
  • The first consolidated draft of the Glossary on Platform Law and Policy – a guide on key terms related to platform governance for policymakers, researchers and other stakeholders alike – was presented as an output.
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Public Collaboration On Multi-Stakeholder Health Data Values

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:09
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Role of new technologies, issues, risks, limitations, safety, education etc. in the Ehealth Space. , Universal health care access assisted by technology to meet UN SDG #3., Ethics, Standard Setting , Value Propositions for technology use in the Ehealth Space.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

 

Block chain opportunity  for the Ehealth care space was presented . A discussion of the data types supported by this technology,  as well as the typical types of records conducive to management by block chain were noted  .  The opportunities for data sharing,  and issues for privacy were also noted ,

Mobile Technologies as a tool for bridging the Digital Divide were discussed within the context of ehealth.

How Machine Leaning is conducted was reviewed and the risks for data input, processing and output discussed and illustrated with examples in to eHealth.The quality of the algorithms and risk of data bias was noted with extension to AI. New Technologies such as Quantum Technologies , Holograms and their uptake in the public Ehealth Space were also noted.

The value of stakeholders understanding each other when developing policy, procedures and technology was highlighted within the context of building trust, so as to speed up evidence based effective end results.

The value propositions for multi-stakeholders were illluminated by show casing the ability of these Emerging Technologies to assist with speed to achievemnt of SDG#3 for universal  health care services globally ,in innovative new ways, wirh  opportunities to transcend issues such as complexities in data sharing, intellectual property, start up costs and so forth, while providing efficient, auditable, effective solutions within the clinical and administrative spheres of ehealth.

Further work in ethics, in all of the existing technologies and emerging technology areas was stressed.

 

 

3. Key Takeaways

Acknowledge that existing and emerging technologies can support reaching UN SDG #3, but good standards, education and knowledge sharing  with robust  ethical frameworks are  key to successful outcomes. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Ms. Amali De Silva - Mitchell

Presenter on Block Chain for Ehealth : Dr. Galia Kondova 

Presenter on Mobile Ehealth and Digital Divide : Mr. Herman Ramos 

Presenter on Machine Learning and AI for Ehealth :Mr. Jorn Erbguth 

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The panel with moderator of 4 persons was balanced men to women.  All topics are gender neutral. Regional represenation and affiliations : Asia , Americas, Africa, Europe . Youth represented on panel.

8. Session Outputs:

3 presentations on independent Ehealth topics : block chain, mobile tech and the digital divide , machine learning and answers  provided to questions from audience.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

Activities plan of Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies 

IGF 2020 Sustainable Internet Governance & the Right to Development

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:55
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1) Bring youth networks into consultations and key policy and design decisions as these take place at the nexus of human rights online, the Right to Development, climate crisis mobilization, and environmental sustainability, 2) Forge stronger practical and strategic partnerships between the Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet and Greening the Internet initiatives, 3) Generate Protocol 1 for Article 4 of the IRPC Charter: Additional clause (4c) – “Usage of the Internet for the protection of the environment MUST BE balanced with protecting the environment *from* the growth of the Internet”.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

- General consensus it that Internet Governance, Human Rights, and the Environment are fundamentally linked, underscored by the 2020 global pandemic and its impact on commitments to address climate change urgently.

- There was broad support for initiatives to address rights and environmental implications of supply chains

- Broad agreement for a cross-sector, multistakeholder strategy which requires strong advocates from all sectors and regions.

- That the technical community and private sector actors must be on board was strongly supported.

- Most supported a approach that includes tackling E-waste (Basel Convention) but is not confined to recycling or zero-carbon policies

- The meeting agreed that Global North historically generates and the Global South is expected to fix the environmental hazards of ICT manufacture and inbuilt obsolescence.

3. Key Takeaways

- Private Sector must be involved along with Governments and Civil Society in fulfilling any Greening ICT agendas.

- AI development, along with roll  out of mobile networks need to be monitored within environmental impact and human rights frameworks.

- Internet technologies need to be green by design calling for accountability mechanisms for governmental and private sector actors

- The meeting supported calls for clearer standards in procurement and designs that supply hardware-software elements of the internet, including electricity and consumer items

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Ms Minda Moreira, Co-Chair internet Rights and Principles Coalition

Ms Marianne Franklin (Moderator), Internet Rights and Principles Coalition Steering Committee

Ms Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky Youth Coalition in Internet Governance/Dell)

Ms Hanane Boujemi, Executive director of Tech Policy Tank

Mr Ilias Iakovidis, Adviser at the European Commission, DG CONNECT

Mr Rigobert Kenmogne, Digital Rights Program Officer for Francophone Africa at Paradigm Initiative

Ms Vesna Manojlovic, RIPE Network Coordination Centre

Ms Raashi Saxena, Youth4DigitalSustainability Program

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Highest number of attendees was 64 including panellists. Activity on the Chat was substantial with equivalent input from male and female participants.

The speakers were predominantly female, from youth coalitions, and from the Global South.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 The Criticality of the Internet for SIDS in a global crisis

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:01
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
The aim of the session was to present to our SIDS community initially what developments had taken place with regards to internet development in our regions. The Pacific and Caribbean communities were able to give comprehensive overviews of their activities since our last IGF meeting. There was no representation from the AIMS community (Atlantic and Indian Oceans, and Mediterranean and South China Seas) but if members attempted to join the session they may not have been recognised, and therefore able to participate as panellists within the webinar format. The programme of reports, discussion and a summary of commitments from the different regions as well as collectively was achieved during the session as planned.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
  • There was broad consensus around COVID-19 being a wake-up call for governments to accelerate digital transformation. The participants agree that COVID-19 has been accelerating the adoption of ICTs and the investments in the Internet, especially in providing connectivity;
  • Many indicated training and digital literacy as more urgent matters, while others highlighted cybersecurity and public policy on misinformation;
  • Some supported the idea that human resources and digital education are currently the main issues, especially when it comes to e-learning education and teaching. On this specific point, there is common agreement that the teaching staff is not prepared to use technology to deliver and plan lessons.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

 

Lead discussants

  • Pacific Islands (Cherie Lagakali, Chair PICISOC, Fiji;  Dalsie Baniala, MAG member, Vanuatu; Maureen Hilyard, ALAC Chair, At-Large, ICANN, Cook Islands)
  • Caribbean (June Parris, outgoing UN-IGF MAG Member, Barbados; Nigel Cassimire, Caribbean Telecommunications Union Ag. Secretary General & Caribbean IGF convenor; Bevil Wooding, Director, Caribbean Affairs, ARIN; Carlton Samuels, Jamaica; Rhea Yaw Ching, Covela Foundation; Lance Hinds, Guyana; Tracy Hackshaw, Trinidad & Tobago IGF / Internet Society Trinidad & Tobago Chapter)

Also speaking: Anriette Esterhuysen, UN-IGF MAG Chair, South Africa; Jane Coffin; Jane Coffin, Senior Vice President - Internet Growth, Internet Society; Pablo Rodriguez, Vice Chair, ccNSO Council / Executive VP, Gauss Research Laboratory / NIC.pr, Puerto Rico; Deirdre Williams, Information Specialist, St. Lucia; Jacqueline Morris, Vice-Chair, Internet Society Trinidad & Tobago / e-Learning Manager, Judiciary of Trinidad & Tobago

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 The Criticality of the Internet for SIDS in a global crisis
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 DCs Main Session: Socio-economic recovery after the Covid19 crisis – Dynamic Coalitions’ role

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:15
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the first priorities that the government should tackle when it comes to addressing the issue of digital divides in the context of COVID‑19?, What effect has the COVID-19 pandemic had on the ability of children to continue their education and what barriers need to be overcome to prevent this happening in future?, How has COVID-19 pandemic affected people’s ability to exercise their fundamental rights and freedom online and what ramifications does this have for people and societies post-COVID-19?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Digital Divide

  • There was broad agreement that the COVID-19 pandemic has deepened existing inequalities and divides.

Education

  • There was agreement that Internet governance capacity building is becoming increasingly relevant worldwide as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Education on Internet Governance must become widespread.
  • There was agreement that education and youth as a whole were harmed by national political crisis originating from mismanaged responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Fundamental rights

  • There was agreement that online accessibility benefits far more than just persons with disabilities. Live transcripts were provided as an accessibility measure originally targeted at people with hearing impairments, but now a vital resource for data mining after events for people both with and without disabilities.
  • The need for fundamental rights online was linked to the issue of education: without access to connectivity, freedom of speech, and basic human rights, education opportunities, particularly during the time of COVID-19, cannot be equally and fairly available to all.

Future of IGF

  • There was strong consensus that, just as the BPFs and NRIs are already widely recognised to be, the Dynamic Coalitions are a vital component of the IGF and its intersessional processes. Support for Dynamic Coalitions, and collaboration between Dynamic Coalitions, should be strengthened as part of the IGF+ model and the DCs can, in turn, contribute to developing the IGF+ model.
  • It was reported that at the Parliamentarians Roundtable (10 November), parliamentarians expressed interest in engaging with the Dynamic Coalitions intersessionally. Dynamic Coalitions were encouraged to make use of this opportunity, to advocate on issues that Dynamic Coalitions are working on directly with lawmakers. 
  • It was noted that it is essential to have representation of youth in IGF intersessional activities as youth should be involved in decisions affecting their future and active youth involvement helps to avoid tokenism in multistakeholder discussions.
3. Key Takeaways
  • COVID-19 has exacerbated underlying inequalities and problems. Lack of meaningful, equitable access to online resources during the pandemic have affected education, people with disabilities to access online shopping services and led to increased online gender-based violence.
  • As so much moved online during the COVID-10 pandemic, it has demonstrated how important it is to provide the necessary capacity building and education needed to ensure everyone has the skills and knowledge to have meaningful access to Internet-based services and information.
  • Access to information is a fundamental human right, for people of all ages, including children. There has been an increased demand for information and resources from libraries and from the media during the pandemic, but these sources of information are under pressure from both the erosion of journalism through reduction in revenues, and restrictions placed on digital information sources available from libraries, such as the number of simultaneous users able to access a resource.
  • Capacity building and support programs are needed to enable greater visibility and direct participation of underrepresented groups, including youth and persons with disabilities, in discussions that are shaping the future of Internet governance.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderators:

  • Tatiana Tropina
  • Hanane Boujemi

Speakers

  • John Carr (DC COS)
  • Olivier Crepin-Leblond (DC-CIV)
  • Valensiya Dresvyannikova (DC-PAL)
  • Gerry Ellis (DCAD)
  • Stuart Hamilton (DC-PAL)
  • Michael J. Oghia (DC-Sustainability)
  • Gustavo Paiva (YCIG)
  • June Parris (IPRPC)
  • Muhammad Shabbir (DCAD)
  • Smita Vanniyar (DC Gender)
  • Christopher Yoo (DC-Connecting the Unconnected)
  • Eileen Cejas (YCIG)
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were discussed in the session. Online gender-based violence as well as the role that gender-related inequalities have played in increasing inequalities and access to online services during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was also noted that gender divides are not binary (male/female), but discussions to close gender divides need to consider the wide spectrum of gender identities and the inequalities and exclusions they face.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Main Session INCLUSION

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:13
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. What have been the obstacles to achieving affordable and meaningful access to the Internet in recent years, despite the significant expansion of mobile infrastructure deployed around the world?, 2. What principles, approaches, incentives and coordinated actions, as enabling environment, should be central to telecommunication regulatory frameworks, in order to spur investment in and drive better affordability of Internet inclusive access and connectivity solutions in developing countries, in order to accelerate its penetration in their regions?, 3. Are there particular telecommunications business models in fixed and mobile broadband Internet services, that have been shown to be particularly effective at expanding affordable access to the Internet, and what are the role of the other stakeholders in bringing about this increased investment and affordable access?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Affordability in the context of Asia Pacific region, need to take into account 3 elements:

  1. Natural disaster that are common in this region, so the cost for preventing and recovery have impact with Affordability
  2. Complies to regulatory requirements, particularly regarding online safety and recovery
  3. Build local capacity to plan, deploy and maintain infrastructure

There are different realities in different regions, inside regiones, and also inside countries, regarding connectivity

For Internet to be useful, content and service need to be relevant. Local content is usually a problem in developing countries.

Another important key aspect besides connectivity is power. As an example, in Africa, citizens suffer from frequent power cuts. Besided, the majority of operators are nonAfrican operators, and most of the time have been guided by the return of investment rather than looking at the ICT as mean of developing of the continent.

GSMA mention three reasons why most African countries are suffering this situation: 1. Affordability (cost of devices, energy), 2. Lack of digital skills and literacy, 3. Lack of content in local language, particularly outside US, Europe and China.

Internet Connectivity has never been more important than this COVID time, in order to satisfy basic needs. Social relationships, economic activities.

Affordable and meaningful access means that “everyone has access to Internet every day, with enough (ideally unlimited) data, with a fast connection (at least 4G equivalent) and with appropriate device.

The current business model is encouraging the service providers to improve the access whenever people is connected with more speed and newer technologies and not as much in reaching those areas where people are not yet connected.

3. Key Takeaways

We need to provide low band frequency to increase coverage.

We have to work with governments and companies to reduce the price of smartphones

We need to think in the investment that is required, and also policy and regulatory frameworks, as the supporter environment where affordable and meaningful connectivity is reality and responds to these needs.

One of the things we need to do, especially to welcome new business models, is “fixing bugs” in policy and regulatory frameworks that prevent complementary providers to be welcome members of the ecosystem.

One of those bugs is having more collaboration between power and telecomm sectors, fostering more coordination regarding infrastructure planning and sharing. And all the savings coming from this coordination have to be transferred to users with lower cost on services.

And the other aspect is new innovative ways of thinking of spectrum policy, where unlicensed spectrum should be by default a norm, and not an exception. Portions of the spectrum should be allocated to the public interest for WiFi connections and others.

We have to enable those unconnected places to build their networks so they are able to reach connected places and deploy their own affordable access to Internet. In order to do that, we have to create an enabling environment. So we need to adapt the regulatory frameworks for those places, regarding affordability, power, infrastructure, or any other aspect that is needed.

We need to be open to new approaches and changes and doing things differently. We need to involve as many people (stakeholders) as possible.

We have to identify and remove barriers to deploy infrastructure (authorizations, rights, permissions)

Regarding Telecommunication Operators, Community Networks shouldn´t be considered as a competing solution but a complementary solution.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Sylvia Cadena, Head of Programs / ISIF Asia coordinator, APNIC Foundation

Vint Cerf, Vicepresident & Internet Evangelist, Google

Sonia Jorge, Executive Director, Alliance for Affordable Internet

Mongi Marzoug, Senior VP Internet and Sustainable Energy Governance, Orange

Christian O'Flaherty, Regional Vice President - Latin America and The Caribbean, Internet Society

Moctar Yedaly, Head Information Society Division, African Union Commission

 

Panel Moderator:  Roberto Zambrana Flores, Bolivia IGF Coordinator, MAG Member

Online (Remote) Moderator: Karim Attoumani Mohamed, Telecom Comores SA, MAG Member

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

As closing remarks Sonia Jorge mentioned: "We really have to think more seriously about all different issues, and bring a very strong, not just gender perspective to the concerns, but also a perspective of rural communities. There is a need for clear targets and clear universal access goals by governments, in a way that are measurable, making all of us accountable and policy makers accountable. Target that are for the total population, for the women and girls population, so gender targets, and also very clear targets to address the need of rural communities."    

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
Inclusion Main Session - Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 Main Session TRUST

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:58
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How do you understand the concept of digital/data sovereignty and why it is important for different actors? , What should be the respective roles of governments, international organizations, the private sector, a technical community in responding to abusive content online in light of the disparity of national legislations (disinformation, but also harassment, terrorism, election interference)?, The Internet and the web are built on technical interoperability and the separation of layers. How much of an interface should there be between the technical and policy layers regarding the Internet?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
  • Instead of solely focusing on the idea of sovereignty itself, the discussion can be moved to enabling social development and enabling economic development because data can be a shared resource in a way that physical assets cannot be.
  • Data localization is being used by governments that are concerned about controlling data, very often for political ends, however there is also a legitimate rational for data localization or at least data control in order to develop economies.
  • In Asia and the Pacific, people are starting to realize the importance of the data that they generate. There is an increasing awareness but no broad-based discussion,, because in Asia-Pacific, not all countries are fully equipped (infrastructure/regulatory schemes) to engage in the International discussion.
  • In terms of controlling content and diversity of views, global cooperation is needed to manage these processes; particularly because the manifestation might be in the content but a lot of the manipulation might be happening at the data level and the data governance level.
  • The way that the Internet was designed was explicitly to encourage global interconnectivity and to be oblivious to International borders.  One of the core goals was to get as many people, devices and networks as possible on a global scale.  This continues to be the objective when we are designing and evolving the technologies at the core of the Internet. 
  • Digital policies should respect the technical architecture of the Internet, 76% of audience poll respondents answered to the affirmative (Strongly agree, or Agree). There is a small set of core infrastructure that maintains the global unity of the Internet – IP protocol, IP address spaces and DNS, harmonization on the IP layer is needed to allow data and connectivity to be seamless around the world.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Bertrand de La Chappelle, Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network

Speakers:

Rudolf Gridl - Head of Unit, Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi), Germany

Alissa Cooper - IETF Chair, Internet Engineering Task Force

Paul Mitchell - Senior Director​, Technology Policy, Microsoft

Atsuko Okuda - Regional Director, ITU Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific

Jun Murai - Founder and Board member, WIDE Project

Alison Gillwald - Executive Director, Research ICT Africa

Discussant: Aleksey Goreslavskiy, Journalist, Head of NGO "Dialogue"

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not specifically discussed during the Trust Main Session.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
Clone of IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Future of jobs/work in the digital age

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:23
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How do environmental issues, such as natural disasters or pandemics, affect the job market?
, Do employers and employees have conditions and skills to adjust to these?
, What are the existing good practices? Learning from experiences of the IGFs in Cameroon, Colombia, Haiti, Italy, Nigeria, Panama, and South Sudan?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

 

TBC

3. Key Takeaways

This session offered a diversified view of the main topic, since the speakers were from different countries and sectors. Despite the linguistic, social and cultural differences between all of them, there had been consensus regarding how challenging is the future of job, considering the gaps related to digital skills, connectivity, infrastructure, etc, but mainly for the uncertainty people are actually experiencing. During the session, the speakers mostly explained their local or national situations, adding some good practices implemented or needs faced because of the pandemic. Italy IGF gave two strong examples of good practices, one of them was the use of Open Source with 3d printers to build respirators during pandemic. in any case, they regret more than the 40% of young people between 16 and 17 in Europe has no basic digital skills. 

 The session ended with some voluntary committments, like Haiti IGF that strongly believes in the participation of women in discussions, and Panama IGF that encourages  a gender focused regulation for telecommuting and teleworking. Also, Colombia IGF gave an interesting example of a law they are discussing to regulate the right of employees to have their own private sphere protected. 

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Haiti IGF: Mr. Sindy Obed
  • Nigeria IGF: Ms. Onwuamaegbu-Ugwu Edufun
  • Italy IGF: Mr. Mattia Fantinati, Member of the Italian Parliament
  • Cameroon IGF: Mr. Eric Stephane SIDEU
  • Colombia IGF: Dr. Julio Cesar Gaitan Bohorquez
  • Panama IGF: Mr. Abdias Zambrano
  • South Sudan IGF: Mr. Kennedy Bullen
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:

TBC

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Access and digital inclusion

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:58
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

TBC

3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Cybersecurity local policies and standards

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:20
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the contemporary challenges for our societies regarding cybersecurity?, What are concrete examples of defence in cyberspace?, What are good practices of successful regional cooperation on cybersecurity matters?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The session discussed the overall landscape of cybersecurity issues within the context of National and Regional IGF initiaves and their communities. Central aspects discussed included the mechanisms and frameworks put in place in each country as means to organize cybersecurity, as well as cooperation mechanisms and efforts in local, regional and global levels. There was broad agreement on the need for improving capacity building, education and training, as well as create a culture of cybersecurity in Countries and communities. Participants were mindful of diverse initiatives addressing definitions and basic concepts for cybersecurity, as well as the involvement of international organizations in capacity building programs. There was also a call for action in cooperation in all levels.

3. Key Takeaways

- Participants manifested broad consensus on the need for creating a culture of cybersecurity within countries and communities
- There were several reports on cooperation between regions and countries, as well as cooperation between local and international organizations
- Initiatives such as the Christchurch call or even the IGF BPFs were mentioned as important initiatives for strengthening cooperation and available knowledge about the discussed issues
- Education, capacity building and training were also key terms mentioned by participants as crucial for moving forward and advancing cybersecurity and national cyber defence policies and mechanisms

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

1. Albania IGF: Mrs. Vilma Tomco, General Director at NAECCS
2. Brazil IGF: Ms. Cristine Hoepers, CERT.br
3. Chad IGF: Mr. Bakhit Amine, Academia Teacher at National School of ICT (ENASTIC)
4. France IGF: Mr. Lucien Castex
5. North Macedonia IGF: Mr. Predrag Tasevski 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not addressed in this session.

8. Session Outputs:

No explicit outputs were referred, except for the improving of networks between participants and NRIs, and possible future collaboration.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

In the very ending of the session, participants in general reinforced their commitments with creating a culture of cybersecurity, and seeking to improve initiatives for awareness raising, education, and training. 

IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Data utilization for sustainability

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:58
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

TBC

3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Digital economy: ‎trans-territorial ‎regulations and the ‎impact on digital ‎sovereignty

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:58
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

TBC

3. Key Takeaways

.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Digital rights and impact on democracy

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:58
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

TBC

3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Future of jobs/work in the digital age

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:16
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How do environmental issues, such as natural disasters or pandemics, affect the job market?
, Do employers and employees have conditions and skills to adjust to these?
, What are the existing good practices? Learning from experiences of the IGFs in Cameroon, Colombia, Haiti, Italy, Nigeria, Panama, and South Sudan?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

 

TBC

3. Key Takeaways

This session offered a diversified view of the main topic, since the speakers were from different countries and sectors. Despite the linguistic, social and cultural differences between all of them, there had been consensus regarding how challenging is the future of job, considering the gaps related to digital skills, connectivity, infrastructure, etc, but mainly for the uncertainty people are actually experiencing. During the session, the speakers mostly explained their local or national situations, adding some good practices implemented or needs faced because of the pandemic. Italy IGF gave two strong examples of good practices, one of them was the use of Open Source with 3d printers to build respirators during pandemic. in any case, they regret more than the 40% of young people between 16 and 17 in Europe has no basic digital skills. 

 The session ended with some voluntary committments, like Haiti IGF that strongly believes in the participation of women in discussions, and Panama IGF that encourages  a gender focused regulation for telecommuting and teleworking. Also, Colombia IGF gave an interesting example of a law they are discussing to regulate the right of employees to have their own private sphere protected. 

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Haiti IGF: Mr. Sindy Obed
  • Nigeria IGF: Ms. Onwuamaegbu-Ugwu Edufun
  • Italy IGF: Mr. Mattia Fantinati, Member of the Italian Parliament
  • Cameroon IGF: Mr. Eric Stephane SIDEU
  • Colombia IGF: Dr. Julio Cesar Gaitan Bohorquez
  • Panama IGF: Mr. Abdias Zambrano
  • South Sudan IGF: Mr. Kennedy Bullen
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:

TBC

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 NRIs Collaborative Session: Technical aspects of content regulation

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:19
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the means of online content regulation? , What are concrete examples of the multistakeholder response toward the content regulation?, How do we set up standards for content regulation while preserving human rights and freedoms online?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

TBC

3. Key Takeaways

The panelists share a common view regarding content moderation that is the big issues around disinformation and fake news online and the problems to deal with it. There are some initiatives having place in different spheres, but also a lot of challenges, basically among technical and ethical issues regarding the use of technological and legal tools, and the borders between private and public sector. Nevertheless all the countries agree that the debate and good initiatives to tackle with this problem couldn't be postponed. It is worth pointing the experiences that use multistakeholder solutions.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Mr. Lucien Castex, Mr. Diogo Cortiz, Ceweb.br/PUC-SP, Ms. Melinda Clem, Mr. Anastas Mishev and Mr. Boro Jakimovski

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

TBC

8. Session Outputs:

TBC

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #13 Trust Building in Cyberspace on Public Health Emergencies

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:25
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Share ideas on the impact of international public health emergencies represented by the COVID-19 on global cyberspace governance and trust relationships., Discuss the role of Internet technology innovation in responding to international public health emergencies and offer suggestions on how the Internet and Internet technology can be better improved in the fight against the COVID-19., Share thoughts on methods and paths for building trust mechanism in cyberspace against the backdrop of international public health emergencies.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Experts and scholars from China, the United States, Russia, Germany, the Republic of Korea, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Malaysia, and Syria had in-depth exchanges on the impact of the epidemic on cyberspace, the role of Internet technology in the fight against the epidemic, and the trust building mechanism in cyberspace. To begin with, the Internet has enhanced mankind's ability to fight the epidemic, and technologies such as artificial intelligence, cloud computing and big data are playing a key role in epidemic prevention and control. Besides, the wide application of information technology also raises the concern on its security and personal data protection, with the trust deficit in cyberspace continuously increasing. What's more, as the epidemic continues to spread, all parties in the international community should give full play to the value of the internet, enhance the capacity of digital technology to fight against the epidemic, and build a trust mechanism based on the principles of responsibility, transparency, respect, understanding, openness and cooperation.

3. Key Takeaways

Against the backdrop of the epidemic, the Internet has become an integral part of economic and social development. The international community should fully unleash the potential of digital technology to fight the epidemic and boost economic and social development. In response to the issues exposed by the epidemic, such as cyber security, the spread of false information and the lack of protection on personal information, the international community should work together to strengthen governance and promote the establishment of a trust mechanism in cyberspace.

All the actors in cyberspace should strengthen communication and cooperation , jointly explore ways to build and realize a trust mechanism in cyberspace, ensure the credible use of ecological governance and emerging technologies in cyberspace, improve legislation on the protection of personal information, and jointly respond to various global risks and challenges.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Ms. Qi Xiaoxia, Director General, Bureau of International Cooperation, Cyberspace Administration of China

Prof. Werner Zorn, Father of the German Internet, Inductee of the Internet Hall of Fame

Mr. Paul Wilson, Director General, Asia Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC)

Prof. Zhou Xiaohua, Fellow of the American Statistical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Peking University Chair Professor

Prof. David Robertson, Vice Principal and Head of College of Science and Engineering, University of Edinburgh

Prof. Dr. Dr. Ayad Al-Ani, Associated Member, Einstein Center Digital Future

Prof. Kilnam Chon, Father of the Korean Internet, Inductee of the Internet Hall of Fame

Ms. Li Qian, Executive Expert of Legal and Policy Research Department, Alibaba Group

Mr. Koh King Kee, President of Centre for New Inclusive Asia

Dr. Jiang Yang, Director of the Institute of International Governance, Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies

Prof. Luca Belli, Professor of Internet Governance and Regulation, Getúlio Vargas Foundation (FGV) 

Mr. Karim Alwadi, Research Fellow, Renmin University of China

Mr. Oleg Abdurashitov, Head of CEO Office, Kaspersky

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

not discussed in the forum

8. Session Outputs:

The COVID-19 outbreak, an international public health emergency, has not only caused isolation in physical space, but also intensified fragmentation in cyberspace. Amid this global pandemic, cyber attacks, cyber frauds, online disinformation, and hate speech are spreading more widely than ever, giving rise to cross-border regulatory, legal and ethical issues and profoundly impacting the global security and trust relationship in cyberspace. Against the backdrop of existing international governance, response and coordination mechanism in cyberspace to be improved, all the actors and entities in cyberspace should enhance exchanges and cooperation, through dialogue on trust building in cyberspace and its realization approach to explore the governance of online ecosystem and trustworthy use of emerging technologies, with a view to jointly rising up to global challenges of public health emergencies, and to joining hands in building a community with a shared future in cyberspace.

During the forum, all speakers agree that internet, digital technologies and digital economy play a critical role in combating COVID-19. There is far from enough to make all use of internet especially for fighting against COVID-19 and the cybersecurity risks are growing. Speakers think trust is the basis of cooperation and trust building mechanism are very important and urgent. They share the same views that trust building mechanism are very important. Dr. Jangyang propose a path for trust building mechanism focusing on building a community with a shared future in cyberspace.

Nowadays, with the increase usage of internet technology, the cybersecurity risk is growing and private data is leaking, Some of the experts suggest countries should establish and improve privacy data protection laws, the cooperate should offer trusted data service system based on blockchain technology and smart contract technology.

9. Group Photo
Trust Building in Cyberspace
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #14 Copyright and inclusion

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 09:05
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can existing IP regulation (notably the WIPO Marrakesh Treaty) support access to content for people with disabilities?, What the challenges faced by people with disabilities to access content?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled’ was signed on the 27th of June of 2013 and in few years made it possible to exchange accessible books among member countries. It represents one of the best examples of an ambitious, pragmatic and impactful multilateral treaty that the international community was able to agree upon in recent years.

The Accessible Books Consortium (ABC), is a public-private partnership led by WIPO. The platform brings together all key players to implement the objectives of the Treaty. ABC offers three services which are; ABC Global Book Service, Capacity Building ad Inclusive Publishing.

it was also explained that there’s no one way to be deaf, so people use different modalities to communicate depending on their conditions and concrete situation.  There are many different ways to access content and many software tools which don’t support all formats. Often publishers don’t invest in alternate formats

3. Key Takeaways

The WIPO Marrakesh Treaty (2012) has already reached 75 contracting parties covering 101 countries and it is having major impact allowing free cross-border exchange of books for the benefit of blind or people with visually impairement. 

People with disabilities (other than visual) do not have a similar instrument, however technological development offer some promising responses.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Mr. Scott Labarre, World Blind Union - “The Marrakesh Treaty and its impact on inclusion”

Ms. Monica Halil, WIPO - "the Accessible Books Consortium (ABC)"

Ms. Aria Indrawati, Mitra Netra Foundation - “WIPO ABC Capacity building programs: the experience of Indonesia”

Mr. Rafael Ferraz, WIPO - "SCCR Study on Access to Copyright Protected Works by Persons with Disabilities"

Dr. Christian Vogler, Gallaudet University - “People with disabilities and access to content: challenges and solutions”

Moderator:  Paolo Lanteri

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 OF #14 Copyright and inclusion
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #20 Attention economy and free expression?

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 09:02
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
- Digital technologies have produced powerful impact on the media and information environment. The range of related issues is wide (disinformation, hate speech, and other problematic content online; disruptions in the media ecosystem leading to fragmentation and monopolisation of the media sector; challenges to quality journalism and attention disorder among the audiences) and posing risk to human rights and to democracy itself. Do we have the full picture of this impact? What are the areas affected? What is the root cause of these critical shifts in the media and information environment?, - Business models of major internet platforms are ultimately based on large-scale data exploitation and the use of opaque algorithmic processes. Can there be a viable alternative business model, outside the attention economy? How would it function?, - How can freedom of expression and media freedom be protected in the attention economy, where the dominant business models reward engagement and noise over deliberation and facts? Would regulation help, and if yes, what do we need to regulate?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The session discussed the ‘attention economy’ business model in the context of the digital age. Embracing massive data collection and various uses of algorithmic systems and processes to manage attention of individuals and groups in the pursuit of economic/other interests, this business approach produces profound multi-layered impacts on freedom of expression and on information environment.

Such use of digital technologies impacts freedom of expression at several levels. At the individual level, behaviours and communication patterns are increasingly facilitated, structured and shaped by online platforms and social media. In the context of newsrooms and media outlets, the emergence/empowerment of digital platforms has reversed the flow of advertising revenues, prompting a structural shift within media markets and putting into question the sustainability of traditional media, also undermining conditions for quality journalism. At the broader societal level, algorithmic systems and data-based micro-targeting tools shape social, economic and political lives, contribute to information disorder and erode trust in the media and in democratic institutions.

The overall impact on information ecosystem remains largely underestimated. While regulatory efforts are directed at the consequences, causes remain largely unaddressed. Reliance on self-regulation by business platforms allows the latter to only introduce measures that leave the model intact, while focus on the speed of deletion of harmful online content translates into real risks to human rights.

With growing demand for digital services respectful of human rights among wider audiences, we witness the emergence of business initiatives that commit to transparency and data/privacy protection. With forces unequal, compared to major digital platforms, such initiatives have however proved economic viability.

Larger awareness about the root causes of critical shifts in the media and information environment is crucial. Further discussion on the ways to ensue digital platforms’ accountability is needed. Journalism must reinvent and reassert itself, both in equipment and relevance

3. Key Takeaways

Major digital companies’ ‘attention economy’ business model, fuelled by massive data collection and various uses of algorithmic systems and processes to manage attention of individuals and groups in the pursuit of economic/other interests, has profound and multi-layered impacts on freedom of expression.

Rooted in data exploitation and opaque algorithmic processing of data, attention economy lies at the source of a wide range of issues arising in the media and information environment (disinformation, hate speech and other problematic content online; disruptions in the media ecosystem leading to fragmentation and monopolisation of the media sector; challenges to quality journalism), ultimately carrying important risks to human rights and to democracy itself.

Regulatory efforts directed at content moderation therefore only address the consequences, while the underlying causes remain largely unattended. Reliance on self-regulation by digital platforms allows these latter to only introduce measures that leave the profitable business model intact, irrespective of its actual negative impacts.

A wider awareness of the false dichotomy between the amount of collected data and economic viability of digital platforms, as well as awareness about actual root causes of disruptions in the media and information environment should be promoted.

To address these root causes, steps should be taken to ensure digital platforms’ accountability for the business model they employ. Co-regulatory approaches should be promoted (see Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Recommendation (2018)2 on the roles and responsibilities of internet intermediaries) and further complemented by oversight mechanisms and indicators (see Ranking Digital Rights’ Corporate Accountability Index), to ensure due transparency. Careful and frequently reviewed regulation of content curation/moderation is needed.

For the media ecosystem to recover, media need to reassert control over technology, create their own distribution platforms, regain attention relying on quality content and established relationship with audiences. Indicators for quality journalism are needed to boost trust.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator:

Mr Patrick Penninckx, Head of Information Society Department, Council of Europe

Panellists:

Ms Amy Brouillette, Research Director, Ranking Digital Rights (RDR)

Mr Joe McNamee, Independent Consultant, Council of Europe Expert Committee on Freedom of Expression and Digital Technologies:

Prof. Dr. Alexandra Borchardt, Media Adviser and Journalist, Journalism Professor, Universität der Künste, Berlin/ Head of Digital Journalism Fellowship, Hamburg Media School:

Mr Aurélien Maehl, Senior Public Policy Manager, Europe, DuckDuckGo

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Due attention was paid to gender balance in the composition of the panel.

8. Session Outputs:

The ‘attention economy’ phenomenon is not new in itself. However, with the invasion of digital technologies into the media and information environment, this business model has benefited from the possibilities for covert large-scale data collection and algorithmic processing, expanding still further the possibilities for profiling and micro-targeting. Embracing various uses of algorithmic systems and processes to manage and retain the attention of individuals and groups in the pursuit of economic or other interests, it now produces critical and multi-layered impacts on freedom of expression and on information environment.

Such use of digital technologies impacts freedom of expression at several levels.

At the individual level, behaviours and communication patterns are increasingly facilitated, structured and shaped by online platforms and social media. Digital platforms and social media absorb much of the audiences’ attention that the media used to have. Their emphasis on speed and quantity has changed news consumption behaviours of individuals, leading to the shortening of attention span, erosion of trust in the news brands and growing news avoidance.

In the context of newsrooms and media outlets, micro-targeting techniques have revolutionised the news ecosystem, leading to the emergence and empowerment of new actors, including social media platforms, and to the prevalence of a business model that prioritises “clicks” over readers’ trust. This has reversed the flow of revenues, and advertising revenues in particular, prompting a structural shift within media markets and putting into question the sustainability of traditional media, also undermining conditions and incentives for quality journalism. News outlets are compelled to keep up with the speed of digital platforms’ content production, which drains quality from news, leads to the loss of control over curation and news choice and takes away energy for fact-checking and debunking mis- and disinformation.

At the broader societal level, including in political communication, algorithmic systems and data-based micro-targeting tools shape our social, economic and political lives, affect our governance and influence the distribution of resources. They amplify viral and disputable content, more easily shared, and generate more revenues for data-hungry business models. Faced with unprecedented volumes of content, it is increasingly difficult for individuals to discern what is true and whom to believe. This causes confusion, contributes to information disorder and impacts negatively on society’s trust in the media and in democratic institutions more broadly.

The overall impact on the information ecosystem remains largely underestimated. While regulatory efforts are directed at the consequences (disinformation, hate speech, and other problematic content online), causes (amplification of data exploitation and flourishing of business models based on opaque algorithmic processing of data) remain largely unaddressed. Reliance on, often badly defined and badly designed, self-regulation by business platforms that make vast profits out of this model creates conditions for these actors actors to only introduce measures that leave the business model intact, irrespective of its actual negative impacts. Alongside this, focus on the speed of deletion of possibly illegal or harmful online content translates into real risks to human rights, freedom of expression being the first on the list.

With growing awareness among wider audiences, we witness the emergence of business initiatives that respond to the demand for digital services respectful of human rights and allowing internet users to take control over their personal data (DuckDuckGo , for instance, offers a search engine that doesn’t track users, as well as privacy tools that block third-party trackers and force encryption when browsing). Renouncing data exploitation, such services invest in transparency to gain customers’ trust and rely on alternative sources of revenues (e.g., contextual ads). With forces unequal as they are, compared to major digital platforms, such initiatives have nevertheless proved their economic viability and public demand.

To make the way forward, a wider awareness of the false dichotomy between the amount of collected data and economic viability of digital platforms, as well as awareness about actual root causes of disruptions in the media and information environment should be promoted.

To address these root causes, steps should be taken to ensure digital platforms’ accountability for the business model they employ. Co-regulatory approaches should be promoted (see Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Recommendation (2018)2 on the roles and responsibilities of internet intermediaries) and further complemented by oversight mechanisms and indicators (see Ranking Digital Rights’ Corporate Accountability Index and indicators evaluating company disclosure of policies and practices affecting freedom of expression and privacy; see also Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Recommendation (2020)1 on the human rights impacts of algorithmic systems), to ensure due transparency. Careful and frequently reviewed regulation of content curation/moderation is needed (see the ongoing work of the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on Freedom of Expression and Digital Technologies).

For the media ecosystem to recover, media outlets need [market and regulatory environment which permits them] to reassert control over technology and create their own distribution platforms, regain attention relying on quality content and established relationship with audiences. Journalism should [be given the preconditions permitting it to] reinvent and reassert itself, both in terms of being fully equipped to keep up with professional standards in the digital age and in terms of relevance, topicality and capability to elicit interest and engagement from the audiences. Indicators for quality journalism are needed to boost quality and trust (see draft Recommendation on promoting a favourable environment for quality journalism in the digital age, prepared by the Council of Europe Committee of experts on quality journalism in the digital age).

9. Group Photo
Council of Europe, OF #20 Attention economy and free expression?
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #24 Online Safety Technology: Towards a Global Market?

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 08:58
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can international collaboration help develop grow the safety technology market? , What are the barriers and opportunities to international safety technology growth?, What role can safety technology play in online regulation?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

UK Digital Envoy Kevin Cunnington joined a panel of experts from industry, academia and the UK communications regulator to discuss the emerging ‘online safety technology’ sector in the UK and opportunities for a growing international market.

The panel discussed how the regulatory framework proposed in the UK’s Online Harms White Paper had made space for a serious dialogue on online safety, and created an ecosystem for the safety tech sector to thrive. The panel discussed how safety tech can tackle a spectrum of harms and invited a global dialogue on standardised performance indicators, stretch goals for technology and encouraged international information sharing to benchmark high regulatory expectations on the technology available now and in the future.

3. Key Takeaways
  • “Cyber security focuses on protecting data and information from cyber attacks - safety tech focuses on protecting people from the psychological risks, harms, and criminal dangers online - everything from mis- or disinformation, to online abuse or harassment” - Professor Mary Aiken, Cyber Psychologist

 

  • “It's great for us to see the emergence of a market of independent safety technology providers - and equally of platforms that are prepared to make available their technology to other platforms to help to raise the potential of the industry as a whole… We need to play our part more actively, along with government and industry counterparts, in actually enabling and encouraging innovation in this sector.” - Professor Simon Saunders, Ofcom

 

  • “The conversations about online safety are characterized by those who want the world to be better, and those who are telling us why it's impractical, too difficult, or too expensive to actually achieve that. I think that technology can bridge that gap.” Ian Stevenson, Chair, OSTIA

 

  • “Our motto as a safety tech industry needs to acknowledge the rapid effects of online harms. If I were to suggest one, it would be, ‘We have to do better, and we can only do that together’.” Roni Gur, L1ght

​​​​​​​

  • “The UK was the first market where we got attention and traction. There has been a conversation in that market which we missed everywhere else.  So I’m testimony to the thought leadership that comes from the UK.” Deepak Tewari, Private.ly
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Chair

  • Kevin Cunnington, Digital Envoy for the UK 

Panellists

  • Professor Mary Aiken, CyberPsychologist and INTERPOL advisor (Ireland)

  • Professor Simon Saunders, Director of Emerging and Online Technology, Ofcom (UK)

  • Ian Stevenson, Chair of UK Online Safety Tech Industry Association (UK)

  • Roni Gur, VP Marketing, L1ght (US and Israel)

  • Deepak Tewari, CEO, Private.ly (Switzerland)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 OF #24 Online Safety Technology: Towards a Global Market
10. Voluntary Commitment

Panelists made a number of voluntary commitments to support growth of the UK and
International Safety Tech Sector.
● Digital Envoy Kevin Cunnington committed to ensure that the use of technology to facilitate safer online experiences remains a top five priority for the European Digital Envoys.

● Chair of UK Online Safety Tech Industry Association Ian Stevenson committed to make industry a constructive partner in discussion and debates internationally, sharing their expertise.

● UK Communications Regulator OFCOM committed to listen and to join the dialogue on safety technology. Simon Saunders invited companies and organisations to show off their technology and how it has made a difference to people’s lives to inform upcoming regulatory developments in the UK to tackle online harms.

● Professor Mary Aiken committed as a cyber behavioral scientist to creating a better and more secure cyberspace.

● Deepak Tewari committed to ensuring that Private.ly measures and demonstrates the positive impact that use of safety technology has on the well-being of children.

● Roni Gur committed that L1ght will support the growth of an open community around safety tech, contributing technologies, resources and ideas where appropriate.

IGF 2020 OF #25 Freedom Online Coalition Open Forum

Updated: Mon, 09/11/2020 - 13:29
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Disinformation
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The FOC is developing a Joint Statement on Spread of Online Disinformation. This discussion focused on disinformation around elections and content moderation efforts by governments and private sector alike. Speakers included representatives from the governments of Finland and the UK and a representative from Facebook. All speakers agreed that multistakeholder approach is needed to battle disinformation in a way that is in line with the international human rights law.

3. Key Takeaways

The governments of the FOC, working closely with the multistakeholder FOC Advisory Network, will publish the Joint Statement on Spread of Online Disinformation in the coming weeks. The statement will include a call to action to governments, civil society, private sector and other stakeholders. The FOC has identified disinformation as one of the priority policy issues in 2021 and will continue to work on the topic in relevant international processes and forums. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #27 Promoting Trust on the Internet through Osaka Track

Updated: Fri, 06/11/2020 - 12:45
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How should we foster trust in the Internet space?, How can we collect and accumulate good practices on promoting trust in the Internet space?, What is the role of IGF as a place for stock taking on the good practices?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

■Opening Remarks

Mr.  Shintani Masayoshi, State Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications, the Government of Japan

■Keynote speaker

Dr. Vint Cerf, Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist, Google

■Panelist

- Prof. Jun Murai, Keio University

- Mr. Lacina Koné, Director-General, Smart Africa

- Ms. Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Senior Vice President, Strategy, Communications and Engagement, Internet Society

- Dr. Rudolf Gridl, Head of Division VIA5, Internet Governance and International Digital Dialogue, Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, the Government of Germany (the host country of IGF2019)

- Ms. Timea SUTO, ICC Business Action to Support the Information Society (BASIS) 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #28 Swiss Open Forum on Self-Determination in the Digital Space

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 08:55
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Our new digital reality challenges the way we understand and exercise our fundamental rights and liberties. On the one hand, the rapid growth of the use of data enables the development of new, innovative services and enhance efficiency in the private and public sphere. On the other hand, the increasing concentration of data in large technology firms or in governments creates certain risks and dependencies. To address these issues and to make self-determined decisions, it is of outmost importance – especially in a democratic society – that citizens have access to data, understand its value as well as the impact it can have on their life.
, With the foregoing in mind, Switzerland is in the process of developing an approach which aims at allowing citizens, businesses and public bodies to actively participate in the development of the digital transformation: citizens should move away from passive users to self-determined, participants of digital reality, who can create and shape their own digital-environment. In order for citizens to intentionally take control of their data and benefit from data and its added value, new structures and trustworthy data spaces are needed to enable this effective participation. This includes – amongst others – a shift in perception of self-determination as a defensive property right towards a right to choose and participate.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Digital self-determination is a human-centered and rule-based concept that aims to encourage citizens to become active as co-creators of their digital environment. One of the issues discussed was the relation between digital self-determination and digital sovereignty. While digital self-determination concerns the actor (individual, company, public cooperation), digital sovereignty relates to the question of infrastructure. Access to the digital infrastructure (clouds, hardware, etc.) on a national or international level is a prerequisite for the exercise of digital self-determination. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that suitable and high quality infrastructures and platforms are established, which are widely accessible, not only in highly developed industrial states, but also in developing countries.

Another issue discussed was the relation between regulation and innovation and the right balance thereof. It was stated that too much regulation eliminates the competition that is essential for the development of high quality products (infrastructures) as mentioned above. However, the aspect of social inequality and structural discrimination was also emphasized. It is important to design data rooms in an inclusive and fair manner in order to allow equal participation and access.

The discussion then lead to the question of which data can be seen as resources (“data as the new oil” vs. “data as the new air”). Data can be seen as a resource of its own kind: their existence is global, they are of a high instrumental value and they can be used in various manners. For the view of data being a resource sui generis speaks the fact that they cannot be consumed. On the contrary: the value of data increases the more it is shared. In this context, the great value of data sharing was pointed out.

Finally, the aspect of digital self-determination in developing countries was mentioned, where the perspective is a different one, but where strengthening local and regional initiatives is even more important. It was emphasized that the further development of digital self-determination must be considered in the context of human rights.

3. Key Takeaways

 

The concept of digital self-determination has multiple dimensions:

Ø    Digital self-determination as a defensive property right and as  a right to choose in the digital space

Ø    Digital self-determination as an individual as well as a collective right

Ø    Digital self-determination between human empowerment (“digital citizenship” and questions about infrastructure

Ø    Digital self-determination between control over data and self-determined data sharing 

Ø    Digital self-determination concerning personal data and/or data in general

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #30 Human rights and the use of AI in the field of health

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 08:51
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #31 Safe digital spaces, a dialogue on countering cyberviolence

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 07:40
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
In what ways can feminist framings help us understand why the online space is unsafe and how best can the framing be used in developing policy and regulation?, What kind of research methodologies and practices do we need to undertake to create meaningful, intersectional and evidence-based policy interventions for tackling OGBV?, What role do individuals, private companies, and governments play when it comes to identifying, preventing, and responding to online abuse?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Broad areas of agreement: 

  • Tech companies, governments and civil society must work together through multi stakeholder initiatives to tackle online gender based violence
  • Responses to OGBV must consider local context 
  • Responses to OGBV must consider how women with multiple and intersecting identities experience online violence
  • Online and offline violence are connected
  • OGBV is not an individual issue, but one of structural power 
  • OGBV leads to violations of women’s rights online including the right to freedom of expression, association and assembly

Areas needing further discussion:

  • The role of machine learning in tackling OGBV

    • Machine learning can allow for quick removal of harmful content, and can get better and better as more people report abusive content. Those reports contribute to the ML training set
    • Machine learning can risk amplifying or reinforcing bias, and lacks contextual understandings. It must be used in conjunction with other forms of moderation, and maintain a human-centered approach. 
  • The intersection of legal interventions and OGBV
    • Many legal frameworks have gaps on issues of online abuse; laws either do not mention it at all, or fail to adequately extend existing related offline legislation to online cases
3. Key Takeaways

This Open Forum served as a dialogue for shared reflection between tech companies and civil society organisations on creating multi-stakeholder approaches to counter online gender-based violence, accounting for its diverse forms and manifestations across contexts. During the panel, we gathered specific evidence and insights from women’s rights and digital rights organisations, as well as tech companies and IGOs on their approaches to tackling online gender-based violence. 

What emerged across many panellists’ remarks was the importance of collaborative product and policy development between the tech companies, CSOs and governments. In particular, the need for tech companies and governments to learn from grassroot CSOs in order to build concrete solutions to online abuse was highlighted. This can help build more localised, effective models of content moderation and reporting flows. 

While collaborative processes between CSOs, technology companies and IGOs do exist including through the Generation Equality Action Coalition on Innovation and Technology for Gender Equality and the Web Foundation’s consultation and policy design workshop series -- there is a need for more initiatives that work across sectors. 

As one panellist pointed out, there is no silver bullet to develop technology that is safe for everyone, everywhere. But co-creation and co-design between different stakeholders will help bring gender considerations into the innovation cycle.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Chenai Chair, Web Foundation (Moderator)
  • Marwa Azelmat, APC
  • Cindy Southworth, Facebook
  • Bhavna Jha, IT for Change
  • Helene Molinier, UN Women
  • Mariana Valente, InternetLab
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender, and in particular online gender-based violence, formed the central theme of this open forum. During the session, our panellists discussed how online gender-based violence – including doxxing, surveillance, stalking and abuse – creates hostile spaces online for women and girls. Critically, the session focused on building policy interventions  for those who experience intersectional gender discrimination due to their race, ethnicity, caste, sexual orientation, or other identities.

8. Session Outputs:

Following from the session, the Web Foundation hosted its third consultation on cnline gender-based violence and abuse. Drawing on insights from the panel, the session brought together tech companies, civil scoiety organisations and owmen in public life to tackle the issue. A writeup of key takeways can be found here

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

The Web Foundation commits to pursuing our work convening civil society organisations and tech companies to co-create solutions to OGBV. In addition we commit to support the documentation of experiences of challenges to online safety through our research and share the findings with the IGF community.

IGF 2020 OF #32 Trustworthy internet technologies against COVID-19

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 07:33
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can contact tracing apps and covid-related technologies be trustworthy and respects fundamental rights? , How can it be ensured that all key information on app development is publicly available? , How can it be ensured that the technology is user-friendly to people with different technical and physical abilities?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Early on in the European Commission’s (EC) response to this emergency outbreak, it adopted a Recommendation to support Member States in exiting the COVID-19 crisis and supported European Member States in preparing and implementing a common European Toolbox for the use of mobile applications for contact tracing and warning. The discussion at the IGF open session focussed on guiding principles, including that apps should be voluntarily installed and that the information provided voluntarily; they should be effective, without tracking people’s movements; data should not be stored longer than 14 days, a retention period which corresponds to the contagion period. Discussion of principles also covered the preservation of privacy of the users and interoperability, which is important as  the disease does not know national boundaries.

 

3. Key Takeaways

Developing a trust framework is essential for the uptake of digital technologies, in particular when they are meant to be used in areas like healthcare. Form the recent experience, providing solutions that increase transparency is important. For example the Tech Review Facility, launched by the EC with some members of the Next Generation Internet (NGI) community, provides independent security and privacy analysis of COVID-19 related technology. The team performs testing and provides advice on the development of contact tracing apps based on security, privacy, accessibility and compliance with legal requirements. Through the platform there is also a drive to stimulate use of open source and gather feedback from the community of experts.

In the Netherlands,  tracing app ‘CoronaMelder’ has been installed by nearly 5 million people. Through public surveys, it was found that people trust the app because of the open-source and transparent development. Due to public concern around privacy, the app had to be built in with a ‘privacy by design’ concept with a decentralised and collaborative approach, design is now available for further applications.

Not all countries are conducting an open and inclusive approach to app development. Trust is essential for the adoption of contact tracing apps, or people will not opt in. Transparency is critical to show how the technology is made, but it is important this information is publicly available for non-experts. 

It is important for everyone to access Covid-19 contact tracing apps, thus accessibility and inclusiveness must be addressed as well.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Mrs Gemma Carolillo, Deputy Head of the Next Generation Internet Unit at the European Commission
  • Mr Dirk-Willem van Gulik, Consulting Expert at the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport on the corona crisis response
  • Mrs Jelena Malinina, Digital Health Policy Officer at the European Consumer Organisation
  • Dr Yen-Nun Huang, Director for Research Center for Information Technology Innovation (CITI), Academia Sinica, Taiwan, and Mr Hong-wei Jyan, Director General of Department of Cyber Security, Executive Yuan. Taiwan
  • MODERATOR: Dr Giovanni Rimassa, Chief Innovation Officer, Martel Innovate
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Digital health must address the needs of all people and be accessible to all. For certain national contact tracing apps, testing was performed with people with different skills and ability. Jelena Malinina, Policy Officer The European Consumer Organisation said: “There is no such thing as an average person. We are a society and there are different citizens and consumers with very different needs, capacity, values and goals when it comes to use of any kind of digital health tools. We insist that digital health solutions including COVID-19 contact tracing apps must correspond to a variety of user preferences.”
 

8. Session Outputs:
  • NGI supported applications for human centric tech in times of crisis: https:/www.ngi.eu/blog/2020/04/03/next-generation-internet-human-centric-tech-in-times-of-crisis/
  • EC Tech Review Facility: https://www.ngi.eu/news/2020/07/21/introducing-reviewfacilityeu/
  • The Netherlands national Covid-19 tracing app ‘CoronaMelder’, which has been installed by nearly 5 million people https://coronamelder.nl/en/
  • Being a relatively small island, Taiwan has focused on tracing potential cases at the border and gathering grass-roots participation from citizens. For border control, there is collaboration with the Telecommunications industry and several state institutions to monitor quarantines. The information is not stored after the end of the person’s quarantine period. The central command centre has a visualisation of the isolation types as well as any travelers who avoid quarantine. This is visible only to the centre and the police and is not publicly available. The system has high security standards. Although a contact-tracing app has been developed ouside the Google/Apple system, it is not in use as cases are very low. However, if the Covid-19 situation persists, it may be deployed at the end of the year.
  • EXSCALATE is operational at the Italian Supercomputer in CINECA, analysing COVID-19 proteins based on data available from the scientific community in order to accelerate the search of an effective therapy against the pandemic virus: https://www.cineca.it/en/hot-topics/supercomputer-vs-coronavirus
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 OF #32 Trustworthy internet technologies against COVID-19
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #39 OECD – Policy responses from COVID19 and the digital economy

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 07:27
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
In which way has COVID-19 acted as a catalyst for the digital transformation? , What are the digital economy divides, limitations and risks revealed by COVID-19?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There was unanimous agreement that the COVID-19 pandemic has acted as a catalyst tor the digital transformation. All the participants also recognised that the crisis has starkly revealed existing and increasing digital divides that build on existing socio-economic and geographic divides.

The panellists stressed that while the crisis has accelerated the transformation (“two years of progress were achieved in two months”), the journey through the digital transformation is only at the beginning. The forthcoming OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2020 shows that despite the progress, there are divides still to be bridged in connectivity and effective use of the Internet, that digital security and privacy risks are increasing and that policy action is needed to shape an inclusive digital transformation.

Participants discussed how the COVID-19 pandemic and the increased online activities resulting from lockdowns and social distancing have put an unprecedented pressure on the networks. They also reported on the increased digital security risks, on the raised level of awareness of personal data protection among the population and on the use of Artifical Intelligence in healthcare. Participants reported on the government responses and on industry initiatives to meet the increasing connectivity demand, to raise awareness and preparedness for digital risks, and to adress the skills gaps.  Civil society also reported on the need to balance emergency measures with respect of human rights and democratic values, and to design the right system of checks when deploying technologies to monitor and contain the spread of the virus. 

3. Key Takeaways

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has acted as a catalyst, we are still at the beginning of our journey towards the digital transformation.

A holistic regulatory approach such as the Going Digital Integrated Policy framework is needed to accompany and shape the digital transformation.Policy makers need to identify, measure and adress the different digital divides linked to the use of digital technologies.

The COVID-19 crisis provides an urgent but real world context for many of the digital policy initiatives underway at the OECD, such as connectivity, digital security, privacy and data protection, artificial Intelligence and responsible data sharing.
 

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Mr Yoichi Iida, Chair of the OECD Committee on Digital Economy Policy (CDEP), Japanese Ministry of Internal affairs and Communication

 Speakers:

  • Ms Audrey Plonk, Head of Digital Economy Policy Division, OECD
  • Ms Carolina Botero, Representative of the Civil Society Information Society Advisory Council (CSISAC) to the OECD
  • Mr Bengt Molleryd, Swedish Post and Telecom Authority (PTS) and Chair of OECD’s working Party on Communication Infrastructure and Services Policy
  • Ms Carolyn Nguyen, Director of Technology Policy, Microsoft
  • Ms Golestan (Sally) Radwan, Minister Advisor for Artificial Intelligence, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology of Egypt
  • Mr Mark Uhrbach, Chief of Digital Economy Metrics at Statistics Canada and Chair of the OECD’s Working Party on Measurement and Analysis of the Digital Economy
  • Mr Yves Verhoeven, Deputy Director of Strategy at the National Cybersecurity Agency of France (ANSSI) and Chair of the OECD’s Working Party on Security in the Digital Economy
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were reflected in the discussion by the points made on the emerging digival divides that are affecting some specific groups and that are building on existing divides. There was a call to ensure that those divides are adequately measured and addressed by policy makers. 

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 OF #39 OECD – Policy responses from COVID19 and the digital economy
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #42 Personal Sovereignty: Digital Trust in the Algorithmic Age

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 07:24
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
During Covid-19, we have seen how digital technologies have been a lifeline for many people in very different situations and around the world. What is your key message about personal sovereignty, digital identity, and data governance?
, Do you see any changes that are needed in how we fundamentally approach technology development and think about solving problems?, What do you view as an important technology or development that you think will impact (and enable) personal sovereignty and our online / offline experiences?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Panelists agreed about:

 

  1. Data is a commodity and is generated and, therefore, owned by us, the individual. As such, we have to demand our rights. Trust has to be earned.
  2. Enforceable laws are needed, and the general public has to think about how it will give its data to companies. People need to know what is happening to their data, and governments need to protect the people. 
  3. The need for collective effort on the part of governments, the private sector, civil society, and the technical community to [achieve] personal sovereignty.
  4. Data must be seen and owned by us and used with our permission, supported by enforceable laws to help us. 
  5. Standards can play a critical role in scaling solutions; including in empowering people, in helping to create digital literacy frameworks, which help empower people with the necessary skills. 
  6. Human dignity needs to be at the core of our thinking whereby the technology should serve people's needs and their communities. 
  7. It is possible for companies to build customer trust within a model of data sovereignty. 
  8. Consumer data use that leaves out individuals who do not fit into set profiles is a concern. 
  9. IEEE and IGF are excellent fora in which to discuss the topic of child online protection.
3. Key Takeaways
  1. All actors, including governments, the private sector, the technical community, and civil society, must work together collaboratively to create tools for citizens, such as data governance frameworks and machine readable privacy terms for all, to place citizens at the center of their data and to empower them to advocate for their personal sovereignty.
  2. AI is being used to measure trends for business, but analysis of trends in health or trends in humanitarian issues will not happen unless driven by citizens. One such issue is child online protection, and the panelists agreed that IEEE and the IGF are excellent fora in which to discuss the topic.
  3. IEEE helps to educate about the crucial role of standards in helping to create these ecosystems and tools for citizens: Standards are building blocks that can make best practices more accessible to all actors in society. 
  4. Currently available technologies, along with related IEEE communities and standards, can be used to empower Personal Sovereignty to become ubiquitous in the age of the algorithm.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • John C. Havens, IEEE
  • Dr. Salma Abbasi, eWorldwide Group
  • Moira Patterson, IEEE
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The IEEE Open Forum “Personal Sovereignty: Digital Trust in the Algorithmic Age” (#42) did not discuss gender issues as the focus was on digital trust and personal sovereignty. 

 

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #43 Fostering ICT to mitigate the aftermath of human tragedy

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 07:20
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #44 ICANN Open Forum - Technical Internet Governance

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 06:50
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is meant by Technical Internet Governance?, What is the distinction between Technical Internet Governance and Internet Governance?, What is ICANN’s position and role in Technical Internet Governance and Internet Governance?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • Technical Internet Governance is focused on how the Internet operates, involving more than the technical competences relevant to ICANN.
  • A common goal of the technical community is to ensure that the Internet is singular, unified, interoperable as the next billion comes online, and to support and preserve continued innovation through the international multistakeholder model
  • No stakeholder can run the Internet alone, community participation in ICANN discussions and policy-making processes is key.
  • ICANN is technology-neutral and supports the bottom-up multistakeholder process informed by objective and unbiased data-driven analyses.
  • ICANN monitors proposed and new technologies, and how they would have an impact on the DNS and ICANN’s mission.
  • ICANN’s role is to clarify and position itself as a technical non-profit organisation and help legislators, policy makers and regulators understand how the Internet functions to ensure that the Internet continues to develop safely, securely and in a stable manner..
  • As discussions are taking place in new places and by actors previously not involved in ICANN, ICANN has broaden its engagement and helps decision-makers on all levels avoid triggering unanticipated consequences: in International Governmental Organization initiatives, Standardization bodies and regulatory initiatives at regional and nation levels.
  • Governments have already recognized the importance of the DNS and ICANN’s role through their active participation in the Government Advisory Committee (GAC) within ICANN. ICANN’s mission should be discussed there rather than in a UN setting.
  • Standardization of the Internet has to stay in the existing ecosystem based on a multistakeholder model, such as IETF.
  • ICANN has undertaken a key initiative this year, the DNS Security Facilitation Initiative Study Group. Its aim is to provide recommendations to the ICANN CEO and is made up of a number of cross-functional participants with technical expertise.
  • DNS stability and security involves a lot of cooperation, with a clear cross-functional multi-community participation.
3. Key Takeaways

In 300 words or less, what do you want high-level policy decision makers to know about what your session reached consensus on? Did you define a previously nebulous problem? Were your participants able to agree on a problem statement about a new issue? Did you agree on a way forward for the issue? Did you identify particular stakeholder groups that are affected by the issue or who should take the lead on the issue?

 

Technical Internet Governance is focused on how the Internet operates with the common goal of ensuring that the Internet remains singular, unified, interoperable, secure and resilient. Discussions and policy-making processes based on a multistakeholder model such as practiced within ICANN have allowed the Internet to evolve in an innovative manner. Legislators, regulators and policy-makers might not fully comprehend the implications of proposed legislations or of new standards, and new legislations or policies might have a negative impact on the technical functioning of the Internet. ICANN, a technical non-profit organization, aims to help and inform legislators, regulators, policy makers  and others understand how the Internet functions while staying technologically neutral.

ICANN supports the bottom-up approach of the multistakeholder model that allows participation cross-functionally and multi-community participation, including that of governments through the Governmental Advisory Committee. Discussions on governments’ public interest should continue taking place within the GAC, a recognized Advisory Body within the ICANN multistakeholder ecosystem. The DNS Security Facilitation Initiative Study Group also reflects this cross-functional approach to technical expertise intended to establish and promote best practices and facilitate communication between ecosystem participants.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Maarten Botterman, ICANN Chairman of the Board of Directors
  • Göran Marby, ICANN CEO and President
  • Merike Käo, SSAC Liaison to the ICANN Board of Directors
  • David Conrad, SVP and Chief Technology Officer
  • Kathryn (Mandy) Carver, SVP Government and IGO Engagement
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender-related issues were not addressed during this session.

8. Session Outputs:

The takeaways from this session from the questions submitted, the comments in the chat and the follow up feedback through the IGF Website will assist ICANN in the refinement of our message about technical Internet governance. The feedback to the session will inform an ongoing dialog with the Internet ecosystem community about maintaining the interoperability of the global Internet

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 OF #46 Beyond Personal Data: Literacy, Sovereignty and Rights

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 06:46
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
No data sovereignty if user cannot choose where the data is placed, PDP multilateral agreement not yet available, Data flow borders still unclear
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The keynotes speech by Mrs Mariam Barata, stresses the importance of the Internet in Indonesia; Moreover, ICT Infrastructure development should benefit the Science, Technology, and Industries in the country as well as the Digital economy.

The first speaker, Mr. Arthit Suriyawongkul, emphasized an interesting borrowed term of Four Freedoms from the European Single Market. Free movement of goods, capital, services, and person. We note how the pandemic from COVID19 influences the change of control over the parcel, payment, work/study from home, and the traveling/social life. We observe the transactions of personal data over these changes. They also influence the privacy of each person since the limit between work life and personal life is blurred.

These transactions also caused an increase in the number of borders for more control. Therefore, cross-border implications exist due to data-driven discriminations. It is worth noting that these implications cause consequences including privacy. The ultimate catch is how the existing data protection mechanism evolves to catch up with the new reality.

Further, Mr. Edmon Chung, the second speaker, added more to Arthit's presentation, regarding our online ID. User's own digital private spaces belong to the companies. Even personal data are distributed to advertisers. There was this interesting statement from Edmon, "Customers are not the users but the companies that pay for advertisements."

Related to these issues is related to privacy in the digital domain, data sovereignty means the user owns his/her data and fully control them. The issue of personal data is just one part of the things but the bigger issue is the privately owned public spaces.

3. Key Takeaways

1/ ICT infrastructures dev should give benefit to the country, societies, people

2/ All countries should work together for integrated secured internet, PDP and increasing the digital economy

3/ ASEAN countries can discuss this issue further in the next ASEAN TelMin meeting for concrete actions

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

- Mariam Barata, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology of the Republic of Indonesia
- Edmon Chung, DotAsia, CEO
- Arthit Suriyawongkul, Thai Netizen Network, Trinity College Dublin
- Ashwin Sasongko Sastrosubroto, Telkom University and MAG ID IGF

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Not discussed specifically, since Data protection and Cybersecurity should be applied to people in general, regardless of their gender.

8. Session Outputs:

Not available yet

9. Group Photo
IGF Open Forum Indonesia 2020
10. Voluntary Commitment

No commitment

Community-facilitated Networking Break: Youth Observatory

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 12:59
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
Networking Break: Open Consultation on non-State Digital Cooperation stakeholders

Updated: Mon, 20/12/2021 - 06:35
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #100 Best environmental practices across the Internet value-chain

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:21
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is the relevant level of intervention when it comes to the environmental impact of the digital sector?, What have been done so far to limit the environmental impact of the digital sector on the environment and what remains to be done?, Which economic model should be followed to conciliate technology and environmental responsibility?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Everyone agreed that is is important to act at the global level to impulse a common dynamic and propose shared solutions, standards, tools and initiatives. However, every action should be adapted to the local level, depending on local specifities and issues.

Moreover, the speakers underlined the need for cooperation between institutions and relevant stakeholder to tackled the issue. Data collection, transparency and education are essentials elements of the solution.

Everyone is of the opinion that much remains to be done and that we must collectively ask ourselves what model to follow to meet our climate commitments.

Some speakers insisted on the need to raise consumer awareness, while others preferred not to give so much responsibility to consumers but rather to industry and to the business model of certain content providers in particular, based on abundance, in opposition to what action for the environment requires.  

3. Key Takeaways

The interventions illustrated that a lot of work has been done but there is still much work left.

Greenpeace noted that “China’s recent pledge to become carbon neutral by 2060 is sending a strong signal to the world and to home. It’s time for IT giants such as Alibaba, Tencent, and GDS to take the cue, clean up their energy supply, and commit to 100% renewable energy,”  Also, Vodafone underlined how a Gigabit Europe can be green. Telco industry committed to meet growing data demand in a way that protects the planet: by using energy efficiently and sourcing it from renewable generation. Vodafone markets in Europe will power its network by 100% renewable electricity no later than July 2021.

These are important  concrete examples of actions undertaken in the field. However,  a common understanding among panellists is the need of more collaboration, at institutional and governmental level, at business level, with companies sharing their experiences as much as possible at the global level, but also at the users’ level.  Education and Transparency have also been pointed out as essential factors in enabling a low-carbon future: more data, researches and studies are needed in order to have a better knowledge of what can be done and to achieve the 2030 UN agenda objectives.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator : Anaïs Aubert,
Speaker 1: Ruiqi Ye, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group

Speaker 2: Gauthier Roussilhe, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 3: Agnieszka Skorupinska, Private Sector, Eastern European Group

Speaker 4 : Paolo Gemma, Chairman of Working Party 3 “ICT and Climate Change” at the ITU.

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The gender issues were not part of the discussion during the session. However, it should be noted that the panel, moderated by a woman, was composed of three woman and two men. 

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #105 Designing inclusion policies in Internet Governance

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:51
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can we bring capacity building tools to women and diverse gender people in order to foster their involvement in the Internet Governance?
How can we bring capacity building tools to women and diverse gender people in order to foster their involvement in the Internet Governance?
How can we bring capacity building tools to women and diverse gender people in order to foster their involvement in the Internet Governance?
How can we bring capacity building tools to women and gender diverse people in order to foster their involvement in Internet Governance?, How can we ensure that Internet policies would take into consideration low-income populations, people with disabilities?, Which are the three main points needed to design inclusion policies in Internet Governance?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

At our session there was a common agreement to address urgently the inclusion of women and gender diverse communities in Internet Governance through the implementation of several strategies: a. develop digital literacy programs, b. anti-harassment policies; which will have an impact on c. amplifying the list of topics discussed at the IGF. There was an interesting point mentioned at the session: take into consideration  the inclusion of people with disabilities at the IGF especially hear impaired persons, persons with dyslexia; and keeping in mind the crossover between gender diversity and cognitive disabilities. One participant also mentioned we should work on possible solutions regarding multilingualism such as having at each session interpretation into the 5 UN official languages besides the inclusion of a sign interpreter. Another participant mentioned it is need to tackle the tokenism problem when it comes to the inclusion of youth in IG.
 
In relation to the digital literacy for rural, remote and indigenous areas; it was remarked there should be a joint effort to foster their inclusion as their voices are crucial in the policy making processes.
 
Regarding the economic aspect of inclusion, due the lack of time we could only obtained one input saying there should be some mechanisms like programs to help small businesses in making their operations online. 
 
About measures that can be taken to ensure digital rights, there was a common agreement on: a. having an ombudsman to make sure of the accountability of principles; b. necessary and proportional intervention in accordance to International Human Rights Law; c. algorithm transparency in policies.
 
Finally, we discussed shortly the design of the online campaign with accessibility features, however we will publish a call for inputs on the campaign after the IGF at the Youth SIG in order to request further ideas.

3. Key Takeaways

High level policy makers should address inclusion from a holistic way, as in the current situation inclusion is analysed and delimited towards specific target groups (women, girls, rural) though it is not consider multicultural backgrounds and diverse perspectives of each community.
 
 In the case of of gender diverse people, governments should design policies that creates a welcome space for them in order to participate fully in the Internet Governance ecosystem: digital literacy programs, anti harassment policies and a broad discussion of gender topics including transparency in AI programs.
 
Regarding accessibility, governments should support other stakeholders on the design and application of accessibility-by-default policies: there are several communities part of the persons with disabilities  with different requirements that should be taken in consideration for the improvement of societies.
 
Participants of the session realised inclusion frame a wide range of issues,  although they agreed we can start the conversation from the 5 selected topics we chose for the session: women and gender diverse; persons with disabilities; rural and urban communities; governments and human rights.  The conclusion emerged from the session was the relevance of  ensuring the protection of digital rights, helping people understand their digital rights and how to advocate for them.     

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Mamadou Lo , Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 2: Eileen Cejas , Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 3: Meri Baghdasaryan, Civil Society, Eastern European Group
Speaker 4: Debora Barletta, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

It focused on the implementation of mechanisms like: a)  formation of mentoring spaces in order to bring more participants into the IG discussion. These mentoring spaces would help to encourage participation from all levels, demographics, and genders to organize gender sessions in order to display openness towards gender diverse people ; b) applying anti-harassment policies at online and onsite meetings;  c) adapting the registration system at the IGF taking in consideration gender diverse people with the use of pronouns; d) keeping in mind the crossover between gender diversity and cognitive disabilities; e) avoiding tokenism of youth, women and LGBTQ groups.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
screenshot-participants-session-designing-inclusion-policies-internet-governance 2020
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #116 Pandemics & Access to Medicines: A 2020 Assessment

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:05
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Which are the different actors and institutions that need to have their norms and processes harmonized for safe medicines to be purchasable in a transnational manner?, What are the incentives and punishments that can be established by Internet Governance actors and bodies to foster a better environment for medicines online?, How do we look at the question of access to medicines in a way that is inclusive of all regions, particularly understanding the needs of the developing world?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of agreement:

  • The use of the Internet for purchase of medicine is increasing at a rapid pace, and this has been further accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • There is no global (and mostly no interregional) regulatory framework in place to ensure the safety of consumers, often leading to outright prohibition of transnational purchases.
  • There is a significant number of rogue online pharmacies selling falsified or substandard medicines, and more action needs to be taken to balance their incentive.
  • An important issue relating to this theme is the lack of a clearly defined role for intermediaries, such as is the case of registries and registrars, which are vital, yet lack defined procedures to deal with or identify which are legitimate or illegitimate online pharmacies.
  • The existing TLD that declared it was specifically for pharmacies (“.pharmacy”) has proven to be disinterested in the issue and thus, it is insufficient to cover both existing use-cases or to address the problem of rogue actors.
  • The IGF is proving to have the potential to be ‘the suitable home’ for furthering dialogue and debate in this area, serving as a neutral space where all actors can engage.

Areas of no agreement:

  • As there are many different levels where action can be taken, from the local to the global, it is as yet unclear where the starting point is that will yield the most optimal outcomes.
  • The DNS can be leveraged to minimize problems, but the models that need to be put in place (white/black lists, trusted notifiers, and so on) have still to be agreed upon, signaling that more studies need to be carried out.
  •  It is yet unclear how to address this issue from a global perspective, accounting for the significant variances in development of different nations vis-à-vis the maturity of their respective markets.
3. Key Takeaways

It is clear that the discussion of the access to medicines using the Internet involves issues that have an impact ON the Internet’s technical infrastructure, as well as  AROUND that infrastructure. This indicates that both technical bodies and political institutions need to be engaged to achieve the best outcome possible.

A similarity that this question shares with other jurisdictional issues is the need to balance a triangle composed of: Human Rights, security, and economic concerns. These matters of jurisdiction continue to grow in importance; therefore, addressing them in a focused, systemic manner will become ever-more necessary with each passing year.

There is no silver bullet solution at the DNS level, however beginning from the DNS would be a constructive start to enable ground rules to be set, which point toward norms that can be adopted in a broader manner. Dialogue within the ICANN community would also expedite actions around both the punishments and incentives for involved actors.

There is a need for a more permanent ‘dialogue space’ in which matters that intersect medicines and the Internet can be addressed, so that discussions can advance at a pace that more closely reflects the speed in which this theme is growing in importance.

The number of stakeholders involved in the deployment and sale of any given medicine is noteworthy.  Only through proper mapping and research of their operations, cooperation and collaboration will we be able to achieve the objective of establishing Internet pharmacies as trustworthy as bricks and mortar drug stores. We hold as true that the goal is achievable.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Ron Andruff, ONR Consulting, Inc.
  • Bertrand de La Chapelle, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
  • Aria Ahmad, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
  • Zina Hany, B.Pharm, MPH, MBA, CEPH (MENA region)
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Access to medicines is a universal subject affecting all people.

8. Session Outputs:

Moderator Ron Andruff introduced the concept of the sale of safe and affordable medicines over the Internet, emphasizing how there is no unified framework or set of norms in place to organize this market.  Rather, the marketplace ends up relying on a variety of often incompatible local regulations, resulting in the emergence of gaps that both decrease access to medicines and end up being abused by bad actors using rogue pharmacies to harm consumers the world over, while legitimate Internet pharmacies often face complex regulatory challenges. COVID-19 accelerated an already ongoing process of people needing to rely on digital technology to ensure the maintenance of their health, bringing further pressure to the theme. There is a strong Human Rights dimension to this debate, but, at the same time, there is a need to ask which are the correct policy questions?

Panelist Bertrand de la Chapelle advanced the question of how highly-regulated medicines are and, in comparison to previous debates held in IG such as multimedia and pornography, Internet pharmacies is a much more complex and nuanced matter. There is a patchwork of regulation around the world that is legitimate, dictating: Who can prescribe? Who can distribute? Who can manufacture? There is a significant similarity to other issues that transcend jurisdiction, which fall into a triangle that needs to be balanced, composed of: security, Human Rights, and economic concerns. He further brought up the point that fighting bad actors via the DNS could be effective, but is often too blunt of a tool, so very clear guidelines need to be delineated for the DNS to be an effective tool in this effort. Finally, he laid out the matter of broad use gTLDs (e.g. COM) versus industry-specific ones (such as “.PHARMACY”) and how those can play a role in these concerns.

Panelist Aria Ilyad Ahmad warned of the need to find a regulatory sweet-spot; not overly open nor overly restrictive. He laid out how COVID-19 derailed potential progress within the WHO around the normalization of some aspects of a freer flow of medicines across the world. Aria referenced his Discussion Paper, “Towards a Regulatory Framework for Internet Pharmacies”, first presented at the 2019 Berlin IGF, outlining the need for national medicine regulatory authorities to be involved for these matters to be adequately addressed, as they are actors actively seeking harmonization. He recalled an important effort in 2014, when the issue of medicine quality was a contentious matter within the World Health Organization, but lacked any international mechanisms to address it.

Panelist Zina Hany grounded the discussion in real world examples, relaying extensive data from the MENA region that showcased the rather difficult situation most developing countries find themselves in. One very important point she raised is, how due to poor reimbursement policies, a lot of patient payments end up being out-of-pocket, which incentivizes bad practices. This is further compounded by how ownership of credit cards is conditional and not widely available in some regions, making the task of importation largely impossible. Furthermore, Zina underscored that governments in the region are protective about local drug manufacturers and, therefore, are reluctant to support the idea of a cross-border online platform for medicines, for fear of negatively impacting local manufacturing businesses.

The Workshop concluded that these questions need to be further explored and better systematized, so that a real comprehension can be achieved and effective action be taken. It is proposed that some of this work is housed under a new DC entitled: Access to Medicines Using the Internet. So, our Voluntary Commitment as requested by the IGF Secretariat is being fulfilled by the group committing to advance the dialogue during the coming year to find the most beneficial approaches to resolve the safe Internet pharmacy conundrum once and for all.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

The organizers are committed towards advancing the creation of a group, probably in the form of an IGF Dynamic Coalition, to carry out more conversations around this subject in which all actors get to present their points of view, concerns, and solutions. The initiative will guided by the objective of advancing and promoting evidence-based research on access to medicines using the Internet.

IGF 2020 WS #119 Mobile Internet Impact on the environment in 5G era

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:13
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. How to evaluate the impact of mobile Internet energy consumption on the overall Internet and Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) energy consumption, with the large-scale deployment of 5G facilities? What impact will the mobile Internet industry upgrade have on the environment?, 2. What measures can the government and industry take to control or reduce the carbon footprint of the mobile Internet? How to increase the proportion of clean energy in the 5G industry?, 3. What role can the Mobile Internet of Things (IoT) play in tackling sustainability issues such as climate change, biodiversity?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

5G technology development will bring challenges and opportunities for energy consumption. The panelists elaborated and discussed these issues from different perspectives.

Dr Chih-lin I gave a brief overview of 5G construction of China Mobile. Although the energy consumption of 5g base station is about three or four times that of 4G base station, its actual energy efficiency is higher, that is to say, it can carry more traffic with the same power consumption.

Dr Daniel Schien introduced that the supply chain of digital services is a complex system, so it is difficult to have an accurate assessment of its energy consumption. For the green development of 5G, we hope to use as much renewable energy as possible in the cellular network. In addition, a comprehensive report on energy consumption allows operators, media, consumers and the public sector to make better decisions.

MR Moore Steven introduced that the potential development of 5G will contribute to carbon emission reduction in other industries, such as intelligent agriculture, intelligent buildings and energy sectors, which will all rely on interconnected networks to ensure intelligent manufacturing and intelligent energy management.

MR Mieczkowski Piotr mentioned that in the EU, people are discussing the EU green agreement, that is, large-scale digitization of the energy industry. Without the smart grid, the Internet of things and 5G connectivity, this agreement would not have been possible.

MR Roberto Zambrana mentioned that some countries in the southern hemisphere, such as Latin America and the Caribbean, were far behind in 5g. Multilateral agreements between governments in different regions of the global south are needed to implement a joint strategy to establish a common regulatory framework for all Internet mobile broadband services, including 5G.

3. Key Takeaways

5G is leading us into the era of green communication. Different countries and organizations have formulated carbon neutral plans for sustainable development. The large-scale deployment of 5G base station will bring great energy consumption challenges. The energy consumption of 5G base station is about three or four times that of 4G base station. In addition, the overall energy consumption of 5G network is many times higher than that of previous generations due to its potential higher density.

However, because 5g can carry more data and its peak data rate is 15 times higher than that of 4G, it is more efficient than 4G, 3G and 2G in terms of energy consumption per unit data transmission.

In the green development of 5G, there are mainly the following aspects: first, as much renewable energy as possible needs to be used in the cellular network. Second, energy consumption needs to be fully reported so that operators, media, consumers and the public sector can make better decisions. Third, energy consumption services need to be more intuitive and transparent. Fourth, there is more cross sectoral cooperation between infrastructure providers and media organizations.

In addition, the potential development of 5G will contribute to carbon emission reduction in other industries, such as intelligent agriculture, intelligent buildings, and energy sectors, which will all rely on interconnected networks to ensure intelligent manufacturing and intelligent energy management.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Chih-Lin I, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group

Speaker 2: Schien Daniel, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 3: Moore Steven, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 4: Mieczkowski Piotr, Civil Society, Eastern European Group

Speaker 5: Roberto Zambrana, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

This session has invited a female speaker, Dr. Chih Lin I, the chief scientist of China Mobile Research Institute. She is one of the famous experts in the field of green mobile communication. As a female representative, she gave a lot of valuable statements and suggestions on this topic. The issue discussed in this session did not involve gender issues. She gave professional advice from the perspective of a female representative.

8. Session Outputs:

1. The overall energy consumption of 5G network is many times that of previous generations. However, because 5G can carry more data, it is more efficient than 4G, 3G and 2G in terms of energy consumption per unit data transmission.

2. The carbon emission of 5G network can be reduced through the following ways. First, as much renewable energy as possible needs to be used in cellular networks. Second, energy consumption needs to be fully reported so that operators, media, consumers and the public sector can make better decisions. Third, energy consumption services need to be more intuitive and transparent. Finally, there is more cross sectoral cooperation between infrastructure providers and media organizations.

3. The potential development of 5G technology will contribute to carbon emission reduction in other industries, such as intelligent agriculture, intelligent buildings, and energy sectors, which will all rely on interconnected networks to ensure intelligent manufacturing and intelligent energy management.

4. The content of the session was reported by relevant media. For example: http://en.youth.cn/RightNow/202011/t20201120_12584204.htm

9. Group Photo
Screenshots of all speakers.
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #122&20 Data to Inclusion: Building datasets in African Languages

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:29
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #128 Global crises and socially responsible data responses

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:01
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How has the current crisis accelerated the need for coherent international frameworks for responsible data sharing?, How can all stakeholders best cooperate to put data to work for the benefit of all? What are the risks, challenges and barriers involved?, What policy and technical tools are needed to enable such cooperation?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

At the beginning of the workshop, attendees were invited to take part in a poll seeking answers to two questions: how willing they are to share their data and what barriers prevent them from doing so. 63% of respondents indicated they are somewhat willing to share data, if there are special circumstances (such as the COVID-19 crisis). 92 % noted trust and security concerns as barriers to datasharing. The issue of trust was thus at the heart of the discussion.

During the session speakers shared various examples to illustrate the benefits of data sharing and underline the importance of trust. Many noted COVID-19 tracing apps as most visible examples, but highlighted also use cases such as:

  • the Johns Hopkins University interactive dashboards on the spread of the virus that inform policy decisions and decisions on provisioning critical medical resources;
  • sharing insights on mobility patterns to inform social distancing measures;
  • collaborations to share data and AI tools for medical researchers; projects to provide accurate information to the public;
  • extracting insights from personal datasets while protecting privacy ;

and many more.

Speakers agreed that trust is the main enabler of data sharing. At the same time, they noted that there is a lack of understanding when it comes to what data is being shared and how. Panelists suggested that efforts should be taken to improve data literacy and foster a culture of data sharing in organizations.

Panelists highlighted the role of collaboration between different stakeholders involved in data sharing. Examples of cooperation between governments, business and civil society illustrated that the multistakeholder approach is effective, especially in the face of crisis.

Speakers also underlined the need for strengthened international collaboration to ensure cross-border data free flow with trust, as introduced by the G20 Japan Osaka Track in 2019.

3. Key Takeaways

Responsible data sharing can provide numerous benefits to all stakeholders, especially in times of crisis. In this respect, lessons from private sector may serve as a proof. Examples provided by participants during the session showed that data sharing allows to speed up research, inform policy decisions (such as when is it safe to reopen schools) and help mobilize resources in face of a crisis. Data sharing, however, should take place in a responsible and trusted manner. In this respect, speakers suggested, efforts need to be taken to raise awareness about both technical and policy aspects of data sharing, for example where a company shares data or  insights from the data.

The need to adopt a multi-stakeholder approach when it comes to data sharing was also underlined during the session. Speakers noted how public-private partnerships help mobilize vaster resources and how insights, knowledge and support from businesses, technical organizations and civil society groups help governments in providing better services to respond to the need of their citizens.

The discussion also touched upon the issue of gender divide. In this respect  panelists noted how the current crisis has shed harsh light on the inequalities in access to digital technologies and the benefits they provide. They noted that bridging the digital gender divide is fundamental to build  trust.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #129 The Revolution won't be Televised, but Social Mediatised?

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:23
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the responsibilities of digital platforms and public authorities in regulating content, and where and how should the balance be struck between freedom of expression and public safety? , How can concrete actions such as human rights impact assessments and multi-stakeholder consultations support policy responses to those challenges? , How can children’s rights to participation, access to information, and freedom of speech be preserved and balanced with their right to be protected from violence and abuse in the online environment?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

This session addressed relevant issues that fall under the Thematic Track of Trust, but also touched upon Thematic Tracks “Inclusion” and “Data”. More specifically, it discussed the way social media platforms have reshaped the way we interact online, express ourselves and possibly affect others. In line with this, issues such as identity, data privacy, disinformation, freedom of expression and youth participation were discussed. 

3. Key Takeaways

The session discussed the role of social media and the way certain individuals or groups use it to communicate and possibly shape the opinion of others and especially the one of minors. In this regard, the session once again highlight that a multi-stakeholder approach is needed to tackle issues such as disinformation and ensure a free and safe internet for all citizens. While different opinions remained on what instruments/measurements are the most appropriate to achieve this, it was agreed that early childhood education is key but also according adult education is necessary. In this regard, initiatives such as the Insafe network of European Safer Internet Centres are important sources that raise awareness but also provide services and trainings to different stakeholders in the field of online safety. 

In the spirit of the workshop’s title the panel also agreed that the revolution is on going and surely social mediatized. Looking into the future, most of the panel also believes that the revolution is democratised as social media provides a platform that allows everyone to express their opinion. 
 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Anastasiya Dzyakava, Government, Eastern European Group
Speaker 2: Jutta Croll, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: David Miles, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Magdalena Duszyńska , Civil Society, Eastern European Group
Speaker 5: Ricardo Campos, Government, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues per not discussed per-se, but did come up during the discussion, for example in regard to the recent women strike/march in Poland. It was pointed out that social media provided a great platfrom to give visability to the events and a voice to everyone. 

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
Group picture Insafe Workshop: The Revolution won't be Televised but Social Mediatised?
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #130 Election in times of disinformation

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:47
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. Disinformation is not a new phenomenon and has existed throughout history, including in periods of elections, but what are some of its new aspects, and how does it affect the work of stakeholders such as fact-checkers, the media and civil society organisations?, 2. What are some good practices that are being implemented to tackle this issue, especially in the context of elections?
, 3. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the electoral process (for instance with the increase of mail-in-ballots voting but also digitalization with online and mobile voting) and increased the risk of disinformation during this process?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

This session on ‘Elections in times of disinformation’ covered three key aspects of disinformation that pose new challenges to democracies and inclusive governance including the expanding volume of information being produced, its geographical scope and reach, and the rapidly changing information landscape. The expert speakers discussed the role of new communication strategies used by political candidates, micro-targeting political messages on mobile devices, and undermining traditional media, as some of the main factors causing electoral mistrust today.

In terms of good practices and recommendations to fight the spread of disinformation, the session underscored the importance of agile channels of coordination and communication across all media and electoral stakeholders, especially at the national level. There is a crucial need for widespread media and information literacy to empower audiences and citizens with the accurate tools to stop the repetitive sharing of falsehoods. The speakers also cautioned against excessively restricting legitimate expression and encouraging a robust public debate through evidence-based content moderation and fact-checking.

Concluding with a discussion of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on elections, a key takeaway was that building trust in public institutions such as electoral commissions is a major factor that determines the credibility of elections. Most countries are continuing to host elections with precautionary health measures in place. Therefore, information about essential sanitary measures and health information must be communicated accurately and in a timely manner, to conduct elections smoothly.

3. Key Takeaways

This session presented the current trends and aspects of disinformation and their effect on elections and recommended a set of good practices to tackle the spread of disinformation in electoral periods, particularly in the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic. The exchanges highlighted the essential role of journalists and electoral stakeholders in ensuring trust during the election process.

Drawing a contrast with traditional media, the panelists identified three key aspects that pose new challenges to democracies and inclusive governance:

  1. The unprecedented increase in information sharing and a significant shift in the way people are exchanging information and engaging with others;
  2. Its geographical scope and reach; and
  3. The rapidly changing information landscape with information related to elections flowing faster and easier than ever. 

The panel of experts underlined the need for agile means of communication, coordination, and collaboration across multiple stakeholders of the media and electoral processes, accompanied by a framework of accountability, notably for social media companies. The speakers also cautioned against excessively restricting legitimate expression and encouraging a robust public debate through evidence-based content moderation.

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, elections have adapted to new restrictions and nationally issued health guidelines. Consequently, trust in public electoral bodies, and quality journalism emerged as key factors to deter the viral spread of disinformation. The discussion also emphasized the role of media literacy for audiences and encouraged improved research and the development of new technologies to respond rapidly to the spread of disinformation.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Laura Zommer, Executive and Editor-in-Chief at Chequeado, the first initiative of fact-checking and verification of public discourse in Latin America
  • Mathilde Vougny, Programme Specialist, Elections, EC-UNDP Joint Task Force on Electoral Assistance
  • Souhaib Khayati, Director of the North African Bureau, Reporters without Borders
  • William Bird, Director of Media Monitoring Africa.
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session discussed several types of disinformation, and its impact on internet users and audiences, which has an important implication on issues of gender. Disinformation is not always in the form of data, but it can also be a picture taken out of context to incite people. False facts and distorted images can also be used to harass and humiliate women, including female politicians, public personalities, and journalists. The speakers explored content moderation and fact-checking as ways to tackle such forms of disinformation online.

8. Session Outputs:

1. Enhancing the participation of electoral management bodies, audiovisual regulatory bodies, Internet platforms, electoral observers (from CSOs and from IGOs), and journalists in the Internet governance debate.

2. Awareness raised by the aforementioned stakeholders and the public on freedom of expression standards, strategies to address the disinformation phenomenon and good practices in times of elections.

3. Fostering cooperation among existing networks of electoral management bodies, political leaders, Internet platforms, electoral observers (from CSOs and from IGOs) and journalists on Internet governance issues.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #132 Inclusion Challenges and Solutions for Fair Online Education

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:14
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1) What are the challenges of fair online education, and inclusive solutions?, 2) Why fair online education is essential to be taken seriously by the international community and what is the bottleneck to solve this problem?, 3) How to ensure the engagement of vulnerable groups - people with disabilities, migrants,
refugees and ethnic minorities?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There was broad support for the view that online education is a huge opportunity for development. There is a need to invest in capacity – infrastructure, human resources, policies, guidelines. There is a need to adopt new pedagogical models and develop new curricula. It is important to find inclusive solutions for fair online education, especially at the time of COVID-19 pandemics. Panellists also agreed that due to the rapid growth of pandemic cases in this emergency, many people have to study from home over information networks. Especially, challenges of fair online education are well identified. Moreover, they agreed that poor internet connection, lack of Technological resources (e.g., laptops), noisy environment and human capital, vulnerable groups could cause inequalities in education, which require more efficient and inclusive solutions to reduce when facing these kinds of accidents. Further discussions are needed on the detailed description for the implementation of fair online education at the operational level.

3. Key Takeaways

This session reached a consensus that quality education sits in the front and centre of economic opportunities, technological innovation, social progress, and sustainable developments. Fair online education provides great benefits for the equality of education, especially for vulnerable groups and the people who lack educational resources.

The key takeaways are as follow:

1 Reach common understanding on the ways to improve the connectivity to unconnected people through more efficient and reasonable network resource deployment schemes, such as improving network coverage, and technological resources, and the quality of human capital.

2. Present key solutions to leverage on the opportunities and needs of building different capacities and on the existing technologies and tools, such as adopting new pedagogical resources, and promoting forum discussions and other activities encouraging peer-to-peer learning.

3. Define a follow-up action plan and come out with a principle and guideline of inclusive solutions to reduce the inequities in online education.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Yang Yang, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: Mikhail Komarov, Civil Society, Eastern European Group
Speaker 3: Elsa Estevez, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 4: Xiaohu Ge,Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The issues discussed in this workshop are concerning everyone involved in online education, including students and their parents, teachers, government employees, school staffs and so on. The discussion did not directly address issues related to gender equality and/or women’s empowerment. Recommendations were put forward on how to find effective methods to handle possible gaps caused by disabilities, gender, and inequality in online education, as well as how to make online education inclusion and equality.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #132 Inclusion Challenges and Solutions for Fair Online Education
10. Voluntary Commitment

Prof. Yang Yang will work together with other partners such as civil society organizations, government agencies in China, to create more awareness in all communities about fair online education.

IGF 2020 WS #139 CopyLeft or Right? Mediating Interests in Academic Databases

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:24
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How to ensure an open and affordable use of academic databases for scientific innovation without infringing monopolistic individual and corporate copyright?, To what extent do the interests of the young researchers influence the policy-making process on open access to academic databases? , In the light of the lessons learned from COVID-19 pandemic, can the cases of global emergency be a ground for opening databases?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Mr Thierry talked about how the private sector also promotes open access policies, complementing the social purpose of the companies with its aim. The sharing of data between the public and private sectors has always been done, approaching some government initiatives that facilitate this sharing. In pandemic times, while it’s possible to go after more profits, it seems wiser to private sectors agents to try to be more flexible to make it easier to fight pandemic-related issues.

Ms Mariana Valente talked about the importance of opening academic databases to civil society. She talked about how digital technologies created the possibility of sharing knowledge and works, but this didn’t come with the legal possibility of sharing, because copyright law posed some barriers. She mentioned that open licenses are not enough, and the academic ecosystem needs to have an active role to stimulate open access, recognizing and promoting these type of initiatives.

Mr Elnur pointed out how the theme of the session is especially relevant to the youth. He remembered how youth starting to research have great barriers in getting access to protected academic texts, mostly because they do not have the same level of access or the same financial resources as older researchers have.

Ms Vivian Moya presented how the government can help to develop access and mediating the involved interests. She started with a brief introduction about how copyright works (and what are its aims) around the world, with higher or lower levels of copyright protection depending on national legislation.

3. Key Takeaways

The session reached a consensus on the need for providing tools to facilitate open access and open knowledge.

The private sectors shouldn't seem like the enemy here, since there are also many initiatives in this sector to reinforce open access to academic databases. Governments also have a role in diminishing costs and expenses to commercial companies that work with these types of databases.
Academia has a particularity, which is that authors and readers are commonly part of the same group because one needs to research from other works to produce their own. There's less interest from authors in financial returns, and more interest in being recognized by others. The pandemic showed us the importance of open science and how it can be effectively used to fight against pressing issues, and how actors from different sectors can work together to achieve a similar objective.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

1. Thierry Nathaniel Kopia (Burkino Faso)
2. Mariana Valente (Brazil)
3. Dr Vivian Moya (The Philippines)
4. Elnur Karimov (Azerbaijan)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session did not focus on the gender aspects of access to academic databases specifically. However, the session addressed the difficulties of different marginalized communities' access to academic databases, especially during the pandemic. Only one example of these communities under the umbrella of the youth has been thoroughly discussed as youth is the most active users and beneficiaries of databases.

8. Session Outputs:

N/A

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #139 CopyLeft or Right? Mediating Interests in Academic Databases
10. Voluntary Commitment

N/A

IGF 2020 WS #147 Building digital bridges: engaging young women online

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:02
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
• Which existing inclusive strategies to tackle the digital gender divide and address women’s online engagement can be further developed to ensure the digital inclusion of young women in all their diversities? , • What can we do to ensure development policies (both offline and online) respond to the local needs of young women from the global south when implementing digital inclusion programmes?, • How can we bridge the gap between the technology sector and the activist world to ensure online civic engagement of women?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • The “tech for good” debate is dominated by assumptions, which include activists as women who aren’t tech-savvy and lack safe spaces to learn about tech; and tech experts as men who lack the capacity to translate their knowledge to the world outside of their bubble. Encouraging safe communications between developers and users ensures bridging the gaps between both worlds. Listening more than talking is an effective way to ensure that activist and community’s needs are taken into consideration by tech providers. 
  • Inclusivity is key to enable young women and men to fully participate in social, economic and political life and bridge the digital gender gap. Inclusive online platforms can be a catalyst to fulfil this potential; combined with offline work to reach those not connected online.  
  • Inclusive teams (from all relevant socio-economic groups and genders in society) ensure that media coverage is inclusive; 
  • Inclusive content ensures a diversity of women’s voices are heard and gender norms are challenged, and men and boys are engaged to effectuate inclusive change;  
  • Inclusive media ensures low literate audiences are reached by making content as visual as possible (through videos, vlogs, podcasts); 
  • Inclusive tech makes sure platform users spend a minimum of data for maximum result, as data is a luxury in many countries; 
  • Inclusive partnerships with organizations who work offline ensures reaching women who are not connected online. 
  • SMART targeting can be a tool for gender inclusiveness. By making sure content is aimed specifically at women and reaches them first allows them to start the conversation and provides a safe space to do so, this can increase women’s engagement on online platforms significantly. These strategies can be used to include women, but also a range of intersectionalities such as race, ethnicity, socio-economic background etc. 
3. Key Takeaways
  • Strategies need to be tailored to the communities to encourage people, and women in particular, to peak in a male dominated world, which the online world is. 

  • Online and offline activities should be combined to build bridges between women and online communities.  

  • Women should be content creators to ensure more inclusive content. 

  • We need to put women at the centre to ensure digital inclusion programmes actually respond to their needs. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Anna Kuliberda - Senior Advisor TechSoup  
Speaker 2: Reema Hamidan - Project Coordinator Huna Libya 
Speaker 3: Jahou Nyan - Programme Specialist RNW Media 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
  • The bridge between male tech experts and female activists: Women are often assumed not to be tech-savvy and men would lack the capacity to translate their tech knowledge to the outside world.
  • The bridge between women and economic and political participation: To bridge the digital gender gap, inclusive online platforms can be used to fulfil the potential of participation in social, economic and political life. 
  • The bridge between online content and women: SMART targeting can be used to make sure content is aimed specifically at women and reaches them first allows them to start the conversation online.

 

8. Session Outputs:
  • This session has demonstrated different approaches to addressing the digital gender divide. It has clearly addressed the importance of a differentiated approach to engaging and encouraging young women to stay online.  

  • The different speakers have outlined some best practices to build the knowledge of internet governance thinkers and practitioners on the best strategies for engaging more young women in digital communities  

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #147 Building digital bridges: engaging young women online
10. Voluntary Commitment

Reema Hamidan (Huna Libya): “Engaging more women in content creation on our platforms to increase gender inclusiveness for these spaces.” 

Jahou Nyan (RNW Media): “I am going to work hard to make sure by December 2021 we will improve the digital literacy skills of at least 100 young women between 15 and 30 years old who live and work in Sub-Saharan" 

Anna Kuliberda (TechSoup): “Digging deeper into understanding the community-oriented innovation culture and adjusting technology and innovation, so it can be more sustainable, and more people will be able to take advantage of the innovation.”  

IGF 2020 WS #152 Cultural processes in the age of the digital revolution

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:20
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Pnelists were debating on the issues that refer to the ensuring the sustainable development in the context of digital technology related to the access to devices and also equal distribution of media competence. , Is profiling on the internet replacing pluralism and are the internet users ready, at the price of time saved, to automate their actions, behaviours, and thus often beliefs?, The followups in the context of the COVID-19: panelists were debating whether children are growing up on a warped media diet and, taking into consideration the COVID-19 confinement, has it been lately even more accentuated by turning the home into a remotely-connected school and workplace. It was also discussed whether the pandemic time would deepen the processes of digitization of everyday life or on the contrary, push societies to direct relations. The question referring to the shape and the future of the sustainable education after coronavirus pandemic was raised.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The workshop focused on the human-media practices and analysed what steps must be taken to build good digital citizenship. It tackled various aspects of culture processes that exist and develop within the global network with the special focus on the individuals facing the digitalisation of the everyday life. The discussion was also devoted to the identification and description of diverse systems of using digital technology in the context of media-related practices and their correlation with various aspects of family life.

The two approaches to the virtual space were discussed: one that compares the old days of centralized media with new media that wants to see in digital technology the source of equitable access to knowledge and equalization of social opportunities, and the second that sees the recipient of the network locked in an information bubble. These contradictory theories were an important part of the discussion especially, taking into consideration the time of pandemic, that for one would be seen as the conviction of individuals on profiled internet and for others would focus on access to knowledge, friends, culture, information.

Another issue raised was the problem of sustainable development in the context of digital technology related to access to devices and media competence in using the network. It was discussed how to secure common access to technology and digital skills to make societies equal as internet users and enabling them effective participation in the changing world.

The panelists also discussed new opportunities that may be associated with the post pandemic situation and the possible ways on how to use this newly created potential.

During the workshop a discussion with the audience was also facilitated and activated by kahoot quizzes prepared by speakers. Questions referred to the digital citizenship education of children and the prevention digital gap in the time of COVID-19.

3. Key Takeaways

- Keeping balance between online and offline activities and parents’ involvement: the digital technology had become an integral part of our daily life, we are overloaded by technologies and are constantly online therefore the ability to effective and safe internet management at home reached a great importance. It is a challenge to be up-to-date with innovation and simultaneously to keep the online-offline balance. It is very important to draw parents' attention to care for their children internet detox and keeping the relevant balance between online and offline activities. Also it is important to identify main factors to support parents to prepare children to use internet more effective and responsible. Parents really need to reflect deeply on how and for what purposes their children are using the internet.

 

- The profiling has replaced pluralism: the companies are shaping what we and our children are doing online and what we think. Companies commodify our communications and it is done for the price of our privacy. Digital space is now less about empowerment of users and more about our data and how we exploit the internet. Therefore, we need a new media deal and also the political pressure for redesigning the usage of the Internet to empower it’s users rather than exploit them.

 

- Facilitating the effective participation in the digital network: it is understood as an access to devices, developing media competence but also being resilient to online threats especially for the youngest users. Education system and also the business has to be actively involved in this process.

 

- The new opportunities that may be associated with the post pandemic situation: new content and functionality that may improve the existence of the society have to be further discussed by different relevant players (governmental bodies, education system, NGOs, within the families).  

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Organizer 1: Anna Rywczyńska, NASK - National Research Institute
Organizer 3: David Wright, Director UK Safer Internet Centre at SWGfL
Organizer 3: Julia Piechna, NASK
Organizer 4: Andrzej Rylski, NASK - National Research Institute

Speaker 1: Philippine Balmadier, 15-year-old Philippine is enrolled in a prestigious bilingual program in Paris where she will sit the OIB exam in 2023 to complete dual degrees in French and English (Civil Society, Western European and Others Group WEOG)
Speaker 2: prof. dr hab Miroslaw Filiciak, the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences and the Director of the Institute of Humanities at SWPS University (Warsaw, Poland) (Private Sector, Eastern European Group)
Speaker 3: Anna Kalinowska, Phd, Cultural studies expert, a graduate of bachelor, master and PhD of the University SWPS in the process of defending her thesis (Civil Society, Eastern European Group)
Speaker 4: Janice Richardson, Project innovator, educational expert and author (Civil Society, Western European and Others Group WEOG)
Speaker 5: Anna Rywczyńska, Co-developer and Coordinator of the Polish Safer Internet Centre and the Manager of the NASK (National Research Institute’s) Digital Education Departament (Technical Community, Eastern European Group)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

In families there is still a disproportion in decision-making regarding the purchase of digital tools and their use (based on Polish research on the “digital family”). Mostly men point themselves as those who deal with technology at home. Women often define their competences as lower than their partners. There is an uneven development of the relationships supported by technology - greater synergy can be seen in the father-son relationship (eg. computer games), smaller with the daughter. Mothers are those who are involved in the school and social life of children, they learn about the potential internet-related threats in children's lives.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
Workshop: Cultural processes in the age of the digital revolution
10. Voluntary Commitment

Prof. dr hab Mirosław Filiciak – the digital opportunities and possible ways of using tools in the process of education will be more discussing with students at the university.

 

Anna Rywczyńska – at NASK there will be further continued and undertaken the activities to raise awareness about internet-related risk for children and also to protect the minors online.

 

Janice Richardson – remote learning will be further promoted but in the much exciting way and also as an learning process in each children’s own pace; teachers’ role in this process will be much way empower.

 

Anna Kalinowska, Phd - ????

 

Philippine Balmadier – as an class representative she will be more engaged in promoting the usage of technologies in more effective way and in supporting pupils and teachers in this issue.

IGF 2020 WS #163 Access Challenges among Rural Communities & Local Solutions

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:15
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #165 Unlocking the Digital Potential of the DLDC (Part II)

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
a. How do we ensure that all stakeholder groups collaborate, prioritize and ‎invest in the needed digital infrastructure and skills to mitigate similar challenges ‎in the future? ‎
, b. What strategies and policies need to be articulated and implemented to ‎proactively prepare DLDC in the case of a similar recurrence and how do we ‎mitigate the adverse effects through a more resilient supply chain in a digital ‎economy? How can the Developing & LDC evolve digital cooperation initiatives ‎that encompass the industry 4 technologies and related methods such as smart ‎manufacturing, Internet of Things and environmental sustainability for the ‎benefit of our citizens in the area of job creation and economic survivability?‎
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways

‎1. Access should be provided for all people to benefit from all sectors

‎2. Lack of technology skills & access is a big challenge. Creating an International Day of Coding is ‎recommended and IBM is ready to partner to provide content, speakers and platforms

‎3. Flexible regulatory framework is essential for connectivity. Innovative use of TV White Space ‎spectrum.‎

‎4. COVID holds us accountable for what we could not do. Innovation would get us to do things ‎better including financial inclusion, life-long education.‎

‎5. SME should be financed and USPF fund locked up should b released to address social dynamics

‎6. Geographic Information Systems optimized to serve the people through a web-based ‎application promote efficiency and sustained revenue in millions of dollars and it should be ‎tapped.‎

‎7. North-South and South-South Peer review and cooperation should be encouraged

‎8. Leverage the African Union Digital Transformation and the 2063 Agenda.‎

‎9. Business Bureau should provide clarity on how to do business and publicize same.‎

‎10. There should be a central website for all to access.‎

‎11. In view of the importance of cybersecurity, all concerned are encouraged to join the global ‎collation on Encryption.‎

‎12. There is an urgent need to prepare for Transformational programmed in view of Industry 4.0.‎

‎13. Implementation of eGovernment Plans should be of top priority to promote transparency and ‎accountability in governance.‎

‎14. Efforts should be made for stakeholders to come together at every opportunity possible for ‎greater societal good.‎

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #176 Assurance and transparency in ICT supply chain security

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:07
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the main existing and emerging cyber threats to global ICT supply chains? , What are effective approaches and measures to ensure ICT and supply chain security and trustworthiness? What are the relevant norms of responsible behavior that states and industry should promote to strengthen ICT supply chain security? , What are the needs of digitally emerging countries and regions (e.g., the Global South) as well as the needs of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) regarding ICT supply chain security?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad support:

  • Ensuring security and trust in global supply chains for ICT products and services is essential for the digital transformation, however, sophisticated, targeted cyberattacks can undermine this process and pose a serious threat.
  • Governments, particularly those in the Global South, and SMEs often lack the capacity and resources to manage ICT supply chain risk effectively.
  • Transparency about ICT security and related processes, including how security vulnerabilities are handled, is extremely important.
  • Certification for modern ICT products and services is one of the solutions to enhance ICT security and, therefore, a buyer’s confidence in digital products.
  • Building trusted multi-stakeholder ecosystems/partnerships are important for capacity building, awareness-raising, and, therefore, effective mitigation of ICT supply chain risks.

Areas needing further discussion and development:

  • Enforcing good security practices and responsible behavior requires effective accountability measures across the ICT ecosystem. Further discussion is needed regarding the design, implementation, and enforcement of accountability measures. Establishing universal criteria for assessing security and trustworthiness for ICT and vendors can provide practical guidance for government and SME ICT buyers. These risk-informed criteria help buyers to select trustworthy technology.
  • TechNationalism and the increasing politicization of global ICT supply chains have led to calls for economic and technological decoupling, which poses a host of challenges, including the fragmentation of the Internet. Further discussion is needed to define effective, widely accepted ICT supply chain risk approaches and measures that take national security concerns into account while balancing commercial interest and innovation.
  • It is an open question if the ICT security certification is sufficient for building confidence and trust in technology. There were also different views if the certification and ICT supply chain security overall should be voluntary and based on voluntary industry commitments or required by law. 
3. Key Takeaways
  • Capacity building is critical, especially for developing regions and countries in the Global South and SMEs, which often lack the capacity, training, and resources to manage ICT supply chain risk effectively.
  • Building trusted multi-stakeholder ecosystems and partnerships are important for global capacity building, awareness-raising, and education to effectively mitigate ICT supply chain risks.
  • Transparency about ICT security and ICT security processes, including how security vulnerabilities are handled, is extremely important.
  • Guidelines for determining trustworthy ICT and technology vendors, based on international standards and risk management should be developed.
  • ICT security certification is one of the approaches that has received renewed attention, particularly in the EU and the US. However, implementing and scaling ICT certification across entire ICT supply chains are in an early stage.
  • Negotiations at the UN are important for developing and implementing norms of responsible behavior that address global ICT supply chain security. Coordination prevents fragmented approaches for tackling ICT supply chain risk and security.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Anastasiya Kazakova, Private Sector, Eastern European Group
Speaker 2: Katherine Getao, Government, African Group
Speaker 3: Salah Baina, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 4: Dr Amirudin Abdul Wahab, Government, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 5: Philipp Amann, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization

Moderator: Andreas Kuehn, EastWest Institute

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The discussion did not focus on gender-related issues in addressing the ICT supply chain security.

8. Session Outputs:
  • Ensuring security and trust in global supply chains for ICT products and services is essential for the digital transformation, however, sophisticated, targeted cyberattacks undermine this process and pose serious threats to cyberspace security and stability.
  • Governments around the world and particularly those in the Global South and SMEs often lack the capacity and resources to manage ICT supply chain risk effectively. However, more efforts are currently taken to increase awareness and enhance education and skills in the community. Livres blanc by AUSIM, Morocco http://www.ausimaroc.com/livre-blanc-la-transformation-digitale-au-maroc/ and CyberGuru courses from CyberSecurity Malaysia https://www.cyberguru.my/ have been mentioned as examples.
  • Transparency about how the technology works as well as how ICT security vulnerabilities are handled is extremely important. Kaspersky’s Global Transparency Initiative is one of the examples that aims at increasing transparency about the firm’s engineering and data management practices to strengthen trust in technology. https://www.kaspersky.com/transparency-center
  • Geopolitical tensions between governments and fragmentation in managing ICT supply chain risks pose an increasing challenge for the ICT ecosystem and ICT security. The issue of Technology Nationalism and its implications on supply chain securtiy has been thoroughly studied by the EastWest Institute’s report 'Weathering TechNationalism: A Security and Trustworthiness Framework to Manage Cyber Supply Chain Risk',  https://www.eastwest.ngo/technationalism
  • Enhancing product security is important. To that end, security baseline requirements must be developed and implemented. The Geneva Dialogue – an international conversation led by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs and the Diplo Foundation  –  has been identified as an effort that promotes baseline security requirements. https://genevadialogue.ch/
  • Certification and labels for modern software products and services are one of the working solutions to enhance product security and, therefore, people’s confidence in digital products. The example of currently developing cybersecurity certification schemes in the EU has been mentioned. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/eu-cybersecurity-certification-framework
  • Building trusted multi-stakeholder ecosystems and partnerships are important for capacity building, awareness-raising, and, therefore, effective mitigation of ICT supply chain risks. NoMoreRansom has been cited as one of the successful examples of public-private partnerships. https://www.nomoreransom.org/
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #176 Assurance and transparency in ICT supply chain security
10. Voluntary Commitment
  • Kaspersky commits to invest into enhancing cyber-resilience of the ICT ecosystem through its Cyber Capacity Building Program – dedicated training on product security evaluations for governments, academia, and companies.
  • The EastWest Institute commits to assemble and maintain a set of essential ICT supply chains security resources to support global cyber capacity building efforts for ICT and supply chain security, in collaboration with its global network of partners in governments, industry, academia, and civil society.
IGF 2020 WS #180 Trust, Media Ethics & Governance During COVID-19 Crisis

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:19
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the roles and responsibilities of digital platforms, social media, governments, and the public in articulating and empowering free flow of information and in protecting human rights and public security during the Covid-19 pandemic;, How can technology help to improve the efficiency in tackling COVID-19 pandemic? How can stakeholders better understand and address the positive and negative impacts technology has on free flow of information, critical media literacies, privacy and public security? How to provide citizens with appropriate data literacies for the pandemic and beyond, How to uphold the integrity of online journalism and public trust during the health crisis? How could collaboration among digital platforms, media outlets and other online content producers be an effective mechanism to fight disinformation, “fake news” and hate speech online?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad support/agreement:

1) Uncertain and discredited information and news undermined the public trust

2) Media and social media played a major role in helping people stay in touch, mobilised resources, and helped migrants, economically impacted people, and displaced people. And social media became the major resource for COVID-19 information, thus increasing social media activity multifold. social media platforms can empower the  credibility of the media if using properly.

3) To build trust online, there is a need to connect everyone meaningfully, and focus on media literacy and governance. Businesses need to be more transparent about their initiatives,and social media platforms  need to be more transparent on their takedown policies.  It is not enough only to be aware about data protection and privacy , there are  well-recognised limits and public health emergencies are one of them. The  public needs to understand the broader online ecosystem and how the social media platforms work and how they are funded.

- Areas of no agreement/areas needing further discussion and development

Whether social media platform should be treated as media and subject to similar or different regulations like other media organizations ?

3. Key Takeaways

Credible information is crucial amid the Covid-19 Pandemic crisis, and social media platform plays a major role in helping the public stay in touch, mobiles resources and as major resource for keeping the public informed even empowering the credibility of the traditional media. Therefore, whether social media platforms should be treated as media and subject to similar or different regulations like other media organizations is a pressing issue needed to be  discussed widely, immediately and immensely.

To build trust online,  the public need to be connected meaningfully, and policy makers need to  focus on media literacy and governance. Businesses and digital platforms need to be more transparent about their initiatives and takedown policies.  The  public needs to understand the broader online ecosystem and how the social media platforms work and how they are funded. In dispelling COVID-19 myths and misinformation, a hybrid model of combining online and offline campaigns worked well in both India and China.    

We need to look at innovative approaches to rebuild trust on the Internet and it has to be a concerted effort amongst stakeholders and nations so that we can address the gap.

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Professor Yun Long:                          Director of Digital Ethics Institute, Communication University of China; Chair of the Digital Communication Ethics Division, Chinese Society for Science and Technology Journalism 
  • Ms. Amrita Choudhury:                      Director of CCAOI,  President Internet Society Delhi Chapter, Vice Chair Asia Pacific Internet Governance Forum, and the Nominating Commitee 2021 Member at ICANN
  • Mr. Shu Wang:                                     Deputy Chief Editor, Sina Weibo, China
  • Dr Elinor Carmi:                                   Postdoc Research Associate - Digital Media & Society, Department of Communication and Media, Liverpool University, UK.
  • Professor Ang Peng Hwa:                  Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore   
  • Dr Ansgar Koene:                              Senior Research Fellow at the Horizon Digital Economy Research institute (University of Nottingham) and Global AI Ethics an Regulatory Leader at EY

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

During the session it was briefly highlighted how misinformation, lack of access during Covid 19 was harming women, LGBTQI communities and minorities. There is a need for policy makers to ensure policies drafted are inclusive of the needs of all communities

 

8. Session Outputs:

A following up panel entitled "reflection on technology literature and ethcs during the covid-19 reporting"  will be held in the communication University of China in Beijing on 6th December. Professor Yun Long and Dr. Yik Chan Chin of this session will be particpating in the panel. Further collaboration between speakers and their insittuions are also under discussions. 

An interview about the session is given by the session organisor Dr. Yik Chan Chin to the Univresity of Xi'an Jiaotong-liverpool Univiersty to disseminate the session outputs to academic community. 

An report of this session is proudced by the Geneve Internet Platform: https://dig.watch/resources/igf-2020-ws-180-trust-media-ethics-governance-during-covid-19-crisis

 

 

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #180 Trust, Media Ethics & Governance During COVID-19 Crisis
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #182&318 Discussion on the Protection of Personal Data/Information and Privacy in the Prevention and ‎Control of COVID-19‎

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:09
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
(1) Discuss about the role of information and communication technologies during the pandemic, as well as risks and rising concerns coming along.
, (2) How effective existing policy measures, international organisations, data protection authorities are to ensure that public health objectives and individual privacy rights are duly taken into account?
, (3) Share thoughts on the relationship between public interests and individual rights under major public health emergencies, especially how to use personal data/information in pandemic prevention and control while respecting individual rights.
(4) What are the boundaries and exceptions to the collection and use of personal data / information? Which guidance are available from data protection authorities globally?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

(1) Most speakers agreed on positive sides in using ICT for pandemic prevention and control, and socioeconomic recovery. Some emphasized that ICT use should fit in a broader and comprehensive public health strategy. It is necessary to strictly follow data protection rules and principles to prevent overuse or excessive collection. Data protection is not a "yes" or "no" but a "how-to" exercise even in crises. Some said their countries recognized efficiency using ICT, but new controversies appear. Some underlined available non-digital tools could be preferred in given contexts.

(2) Experts focused on relationship between public interests and privacy protection. Some thought we should incorporate in public interests all rules and conditions for  privacy and personal data protection. All agreed the priority of all nations is to overcome the pandemic. No public safety, no personal interests, and vice versa. Personal data/information and privacy is a universal fundamental right enshrined in art 12 of UDHR and other important international instruments. There are privacy-friendly solutions to strengthen efforts today in avoiding chilling effect on rights to privacy tomorrow.

(3) Some thought we should respect different national conditions in different countries and regions. We are facing digital and privacy protection gaps to be tackled and preferably closed. Therefore, we should understand each other deeper.

(4) Some emphasized exceptional measures by governments must be provided by law, respect the essence of fundamental rights and freedom, and be necessary and proportionate in democratic societies. Manners addressing health crisis would test resilience of data protection principles as key components of effective functioning of democracies. One speaker underlined that the future lies in our capacity to react promptly to new challenges without undermining our core values and putting societies at greater risks. Another speaker from developing country emphasized policy making should be based on national facts.

3. Key Takeaways

(1) The use of ICT in fighting against COVID-19 and in socioeconomic recovery should be promoted, just as the underlying privacy and personal data/information protection of individuals.

(2) We should put emphasis on principles of reasonableness, proportionality, data security, transparency and accountability in order to uphold individual rights as many experts pointed out during the meeting. Trust is important in this process. It includes the trust between countries, between individual and government authority, and between businesses. It also includes individual trust on new technology and applications.

(3) Personal data/information and privacy protection is a global issue, there is no country that can stay aloof from the affair. We should initiate international cooperation on the basis of deepened mutual trust, promoting international regulations in data protection. The Council of Europe put an emphasis on that many counties, regions to accede to Convention 108, which is an international public law document on data protection at global level, containing data protection rules and principles which are already adopted by a lot of countries and regions. With 55 states parties, the Convention is at present the only legally binding international treaty worldwide. China has always paid a lot of attention to privacy and personal data/information protection and proposed Global Initiative on Data Security this year, calling on states, ICT enterprises and international society to support and participate, hoping to make contributions to the global society.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderators:

Prof.Li Yuxiao, Secretary-General of CyberSecurity Association of China

Ms.Tamar Kaldani, First Vice-Chair of the Committee of Convention 108

Speakers:

Mr.Liang Hao, Deputy Director-General of Bureau of International Cooperation, Cyberspace Administration of China

Mr. Jan Kleijssen, Director of Information Society and Action against Crime, Council of Europe

Mr. Peng Feng, Deputy Secretary-General of China Internet Development Foundation

Ms. Dr. Stephanie Perrin, President of Digital Discretion, Canada, Chair of the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group

Mr. Luigi Gambardella, President of ChinaEU

Mr.Ricky Rakesh, Faculty and Researcher on Data Privacy and Protection, India

Mr.Fang Yu, Director of Cyberlaw Research Center, China Academy of Information and Communications Technology

Ms.Francesca Musiani, Researcher at CNRS, France

Mr. Wang Lei, Senior Counsel of Sina Group

Mr.T. George-Maria Tyendezwa, Head of Cybercrime Prosecution Unit, Nigeria

Ms. Wang Li, Researcher at Information Security Law Institute, Xi'An Jiaotong University Suzhou Academy, China

Mr. Eduardo Bertoni, President of the Argentinian DPA

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

This workshop maintained a balance regarding gender of speakers and audience. In addition, we’ve brought youth to our meeting by inviting students from Research Base for Internet Governance of Beijing University of Post and Telecommunications.

8. Session Outputs:

Majority from the workshop reached the agreement that ICT has played and is currently playing a critical role in the prevention and control of COVID-19 as well as the economic recovery worldwide. It was also underlined that the protection of privacy, personal data/information is facing challenges globally, considering the the complexity of measures and the underlying technology. There is an urgent need to figure out how to incorporate rules and principles pertaining to the protection of privacy and personal data/information into actions carried out for public interests during the pandemic. It is necessary to strictly follow data protection rules and principles to prevent overuse or excessive collection. It was highlighted that the different national conditions in different countries and regions must be respected. There is therefore a high need for a better mutual understanding and  for building a global community with a shared future, in order to tackle or preferably close gaps.

In terms of specific measures and policy recommendations, emphasis should be put on principles of reasonableness, proportionality, data security, transparency and accountability in order to uphold individual rights as many experts pointed out during the meeting. Many speakers underscored how trust is important in this process. It should expand to building  trust between countries, between individuals and government authorities, between businesses and civil society as well as other stakeholders. It should also include individual trust in new technology and applications which also necessitates a range of measures such as transparency, explainability, algorithmic vigilance, privacy impact assessments and oversight. Furthermore, practical cases  discussed during the workshop that have positive results in the protection privacy and personal data/information during epidemic prevention and control as well as during socioeconomic recovery should also be used as a reference globally.

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #182&318 Discussion on the Protection of Personal
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #187 Open data For Women and Persons with disabilities

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:04
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1.What are the existing legal frameworks on open data and what are the gaps these policies have?
2.What are the challenges being faced by the Persons with Disabilities?
3.What is the role of Civil Society Organizations and governments in ensuring women and PWDs access open data?

2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Open data policies should be able to provide frameworks for opening up access to government data and provide governance mechanisms. Policies from governments should always highlight the requirements for the successful implementation of open data for all people including Women and Persons with disabilities. These policies must aim at making all public sector data open by default with exception to personal identifiable information and data with security or commercial or intellectual property rights or environmental restrictions. Women and Persons with Disabilities lack enough representation when it comes to data policy formulation and implementation with the perception that they cannot use technology due to varied reasons of the society. This therefore means Women and Persons with disabilities must have ICT tools and Infrastructure to be able to access the Open Data on Government platforms.

3. Key Takeaways
Governments need to develop teams, strategies, action plans and policies in support of their commitments towards Open data. 
•Governments should add metadata to ensure that data can be understood by citizens especially women, minority groups, PWDs and found via search engines.
•Governments should clearly communicate the data they hold, Prioritize data to publish, Make data permanently accessible and findable
•Governments need to have standard formats for publishing data that women and PWDs can interpret.
•Governments should provide public data guidelines and standards for the publication of (open) government data on accessibility.
Establishment of collaborations and movements with the agenda to enhance access to open data by women and PWDs plus other vulnerable groups.
Civil Society Organizations need to run campaigns for Open data in order to create more awareness in all communities, for effective campaigns for open data they need to work with data technologists, informational professionals, computer experts, academia and ordinary citizens who advocate for greater access to government data.
 
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Joan Katambi, Intergovernmental Organization, African Group
Speaker 2: Rebecca Ryakitimbo, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 3: Peace Oliver Amuge, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 4: Eileen Kwiponya, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 5: Innocent Adriko, Civil Society, African Group

Speaker 5: Shamim Nampijja, Civil Society, African Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Given the worth and value of open data, it is important that government data is accessible to everyone including women and Persons with disabilities. It is evident that most of the women in East Africa live in rural areas where digital inclusion has remained a challenge, with the high cost of the Internet in East Africa and connectivity challenges in many parts of the region, promoting open data has proved to be a nightmare. Whereas a percentage of the women access the Internet, it has continued a treat to the majority of the women especially in rural communities.

8. Session Outputs:
  • Out lined strategies to ensure Women and Women and Persons with disabilities access Open Data.
  • Awareness on Open Data policies across East Africa.
  • The need to have standard formats for publishing data that women and Women and Persons with disabilities can interpret
  • The need to have platforms that provide open data.
  • The need to have the right datasets and data dictionaries
  • Establishment of collaborations and movements with the agenda to enhance access to Open Data by Women and Persons with disabilities plus other vulnerable groups.
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #187 Open data For Women and Persons with disabilities
10. Voluntary Commitment

I will use my organization Digital Literacy Initiative together with other partners such as civil society organizations, government agencies and academia among others to create more awareness in all communities about Open Data and access.

IGF 2020 WS #194 Governing Cross Border Data Flow & Sustainable Development

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:26
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #195 Protection or Participation? Child Rights in a New Normal

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:29
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
‎1.‎ What can policymakers learn about protecting children’s rights from the extreme ‎circumstances brought about by the global pandemic?‎, ‎2.‎ How must we balance considerations relating to protection and participation?‎, ‎3.‎ What more needs to be done to protect children’s wide-ranging privacy needs (from the right ‎to privacy for victims of online CSAM, to personal privacy in terms of sharing their information, ‎to commercial entities profiting from their data in ways that are not transparent and do not ‎seem fair to them) and meet their expectations from us as key stakeholders?‎
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Speakers covered:‎

•    Experience of international law enforcement in terms of child sexual abuse and exploitation ‎during the global COVID19 response, in particular ‘lockdown’ – summarizing findings from the ‎INTERPOL’s September report.‎

•    Frontline experience from Sawa, the Palestinian child helpline, which supported an increased ‎number of children contacting them during lockdown about physical and sexual abuse at ‎home, anxiety about economic fallout issues (not enough money for food, unable to afford ‎connectivity to continue lessons), and suicidal ideation.‎

•    Research findings on children’s experience of COVID, including access to education and social ‎groups; reflections on some of the issues facing these and the fact that in our rush to respond ‎to a crisis, children’s views on how their online spaces has, again, been overlooked. ‎

•    Experience of a young leader and UNICEF volunteer from South Africa, who explained how ‎young people who have connectivity have been able to continue to enjoy many of their ‎fundamental rights by moving them into the digital world (for example, online learning, virtual ‎workshops, and mentoring taking place via WhatsApp) – but underscored that the less ‎privileged young people, without connectivity, missed out and became further disadvantaged. ‎

•    Younger children’s online lives: Children are increasingly online – and younger children who ‎were not previously connected came online during lockdown, and are now likely to remain ‎connected, even if prior to the pandemic they would perhaps not have been allowed so young ‎‎– Uri Sadeh.‎

 

3. Key Takeaways

There was very broad alignment and consensus that the question of ‘protection or participation’ should not be treated as a choice but as an important balance to be struck – with responsibilities for all actors, including industry, policymakers, parents or caregivers, and educators.

Where access to connectivity was available, there was the option to provide continuity – of support services, of education, of school workshops (via zoom) and youth mentoring programmes (via WhatsApp) – showing the potential connectivity to support children’s fundamental participation rights.

The critical importance of closing digital divides also emerged as one area of consensus. The perspectives and arguments shared on this topic include:

  • Observations that throughout the pandemic, technology has provided many children with a vital point of continuity and connection. Of course, this is not true for all children: we urgently need mechanisms for addressing the digital inclusion of those children without regular and reliable access to technology and the internet. But for those with access, technology has been key to their wellbeing, and this is reflected in sharp increases in their use of technology – Amanda Third
  • Pandemic has also taught us how unequal society is. Kids from disadvantaged backgrounds could not continue with e-learning – speaks to need for partnerships with private sector and governments to ensure all kids have access to the same opportunities, no matter their background – Bongani Dlamini
  • Children need to continue with their learning – in response to the pandemic, Sawa staff set up a system for people to donate old mobiles then they distributed them to families. In families with shared devices, not all children could get online to learn – and girls were most likely to suffer from this – Ohaila Shomar
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #195 Protection or Participation? Child Rights in a New Normal
10. Voluntary Commitment
  • Ohaila Shomar – voluntary community initiative to improve access to learning.
  • Uri Sadeh – commit to continuing daily struggle to meet the protection needs through the continuous work of Interpol’s crimes against children unit.
  • Amanda Third – explore the question of how to realize children’s participation rights under the conditions of physical distancing.
  • Natasha Jackson – to listen to youth voices within GSMA, encouraging our leaders to get young voices on the agenda at our events and encourage business leaders to hear directly from young voices.
  • Bongani Dlamini – 1) continue to share and create stories to raise awareness online; 2) continue having more roadshows around the country to promote safe use of the internet directly with children; 3) volunteer my time to organizations like GSMA and UNICEF to share young people’s experiences.
IGF 2020 WS #202 Digital Discrimination during the COVID 19 Pandemic

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:27
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
COVID 19 pandemic’s real impact on Persons with Disabilities and those with specific needs because of technical exclusion and solutions that can be implemented with examples of good practices. , Educating Governments on what needs to be done by raising awareness of technical solutions with education. How remote participation and remote participation tools should be set up to include all participants , What participation of Persons with Disabilities means in practice? How to ensure persons with disabilities are consulted on key policy and accessibility developments.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

PwD and especially older people have been affected discrimination in digital access to a greater extend during the  pandemic. It has highlighted the tremendous deficiencies and exposed gaps in the accessibility of strategic services in education, government and health services infrastructure and content.There is a delay in adopting and implementing WCAG, signifying that web accessibility is not a priority.  Lack of accessible information creates a risk to managing the pandemic and a risk to people’s health, wellbeing and the saving of lives. There is lack of education of IT people, policy makers etc. on how to make accessible digital contents and services. The need of direct involvement of PwD in the design of products and services, policy development, standardization etc. (Nothing about us without us) as it enables to get the benefits of Artificial Inteligence (AI) and don't have inaccessible technologies that that we have to chase behind and retro-fit and make accessible again. There is a need to include people who understand about disability, social issues, the limitations, rights. In some health hazards, risk and emergency situations it is not acceptable that there’s a limited access to full and accurate information - to have the best results it’s worth supporting a combination of technology providing captions and the work of captioners. AI is a game-changer but it's not 100% accurate. To have an effective design of technologies we have a very good balance between all of these interests and needs. Opportunities offered by Video Relay Interpretation ( VRI) have been presented and how they can support inclusion of persons wish sensory issues, deafness and vision loss. Digital Accessibility Rights Evaluation Index (DARE) was presented by G3ict representative showing slow progress but some areas of optimism that we are moving in the right direction.

 

3. Key Takeaways

Accessibility has to be part of mainstream education and digital qualification, as stipulated by the UN CRPD  from the beginning as the developers, IT support and policy makers need to better understand the issues of not only accessibility but also the digital world.

Digital technology is no longer a luxury or a convenience, it is an absolute necessity so there is a need to look at the accessibility more strategically - to have a structure that would prevent PwD from being excluded. The advocation, including accessibility throughout education and particularly IT to make sure that people are aware of accessibility and know how to address it in all these capacities.

Much of accessibility is feasible and standards and technologies and solutions exist already. Legislations just needs to be implemented. The need of laws and regulations in effect that help regulators or other people to guarantee certain rights.

To make sure momentum in ICT accessibility supporting legislation continues to be a positive trend and that digital accessibility solution standards and guidelines exist. They must be made available to build an exclusive, accessible and sustainable digital world so there is a need to continue to advocate that. Getting countries to adopt these standards and really promoting them, making sure they know how to do it from the implementation standpoint (training and certification). The involvement of people with disabilities in these actions is important.

Choice is important for people with hearing loss because they interact in a specific way with other people and technology based on the level of their ability to hear. It is very important to look at how people choose to interact with the Internet and with all the different services and provide the range of ways to contacted.

 

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Andrea Saks -  ITU JCA-AHF - Opening remarks

Lidia Best – National Association of Deafened People 

Fernando Botelho – f123.org 

Shadi Abou Zahra – W3C

Masahito Kawamori – Keio University 

Christopher Lee – G3ict  

Q&A session

Andrea Saks - Closing remarks

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session pannelist representation followed gender distribution as much as possible. There were no specific discussions touching on gender issues in respect to accessibility issues since both genders are affected.

8. Session Outputs:

1. G3ict Digital Accessibility Rights Evaluation-DARE Index https://g3ict.org/publication/dare-index-2020-global-progress-by-crpd-states-parties

2. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ( WCAG) https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/ https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/

3. Training in accesible digital content and accessibility https://digital-accessibility.eu/?fbclid=IwAR1ObR-1oGNlExC9ckcGL3rtY168504qD-0t_jeFYk-rtG0rsTvt7Xa7NTo

4. ITU-T Technical Paper - Guidelines for supporting remote participation in meetings for all (2015)https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/opb/tut/T-TUT-FSTP-2015-ACC-PDF-E.pdf

5. FSTP-ACC.WebVRI - Guideline on web-based remote sign language interpretation or video remote interpretation (VRI) system https://www.itu.int/pub/T-TUT-FSTP-2020-ACC.WEBVRI

6. NADP simple factsheets for users and organisers of online meetings https://www.nadp.org.uk/events/?fbclid=IwAR1ObR-1oGNlExC9ckcGL3rtY168504qD-0t_jeFYk-rtG0rsTvt7Xa7NTo

 

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #202 Digital Discrimination during the COVID 19 Pandemic
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #204 Internet Data Protection Under Different Jurisdictions

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:51
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Does the current situation allow for Data protection of all Internet end users?, To what extent, could the development of international norms and principles facilitate common approaches and interoperability of data protection frameworks, and also facilitate international trade and cooperation?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There was broad support for the view that the protection of users’ Internet data is not easy under multiple different jurisdictions. Several approaches were mentioned to address this issue: Most of the interventions supported the coordination of the efforts to harmonize the existing legal frameworks and try to build on the agreed on principles while some participants argued that the only way to reach real Internet data protection is to reach an international binding regulation.

3. Key Takeaways
  • The discussion amongst policymakers, experts, and stakeholders on how to blend principles of users’ data protection is poignant in a post-CIVOD globe.
  • Yet, the ability to build a global consensus and international legislative framework on users’ data protection is extremely challenging due to the vast polity economy of the internet and the diverse policy environment of states.
  • Nonetheless, we need to activate a solution even though the probability of solving the problem through a global legal consensus is still doubtful. There are also existing frameworks that can be built on such as UNDHR, GDPR.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Badii Farzaneh, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group

El Bekri Mohamed, Government, African Group

Kulesza Joanna, Civil Society, Eastern European Group

Lanfranco Sam, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Sanchez Leon, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #204 Internet Data Protection Under Different Jurisdictions
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #207 Ensuring Trusted Data Sharing for Monitorining the SDGs

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How to maximize the benefits of data sharing, while minimizing its associated risks, such as confidentiality and privacy issues? , What is the potential of private sector’s data, e.g. big data sources (social media, web data, transaction data, image data) to the production of reliable and timely public statistics? , • How can governments and institutions from the private sector engage in the debate on a new and comprehensive data production ecosystem?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There was overall agreement on that:

Administrative, national statistical and big data need to complementary, one will not substitute the others.

There are still significant limitations in data availabitity, particularly  in the African region. In countires with low levels of digitalisation there is also scarcity of big data.

One-off initiatives are not sustainable - such as it is the case of several COVID-19-related data sharing models.

“Data sharing” does not literally mean “sharing datasets”, it might be enough to share statistics derived from those datasets.

No significan points of disagreement were identified. 

 

 

  

3. Key Takeaways

Traditional data producers are still essential, but traditional methods alone may not be able to meet policy design and SDG monitoring needs in a timely and cost-effective manner.

Long term data ecosystems need to be put in place and address the issue of privacy and equal access.

There is still a long way to go in order to advance dialogue between industry and statistical offices for an effective collaboration. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Alison Gillwald, RIA – Research ICT Africa (Civil society, Africa)
  • Helani Galpaya, LIRNEASIA (Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group)
  • Daniel Ker, OECD (International Organization)  
  • Jaco Toit, UNESCO (Intergovernmental Organization)
  • Mark Uhrbach, STATISTIC CANADA (Government, Western European and Others Group)
  • Dominik Rozkrut, STATISTICS POLAND (Government, Eastern European Group)
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

A call for voluntary commitments was made by the session moderator, the speakers chose to express them later in the written form. 

IGF 2020 WS #210 Nobody Left Behind - Interregional Cyber Capacity Building

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:56
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
To what extent can good practices from one region be applied to others? Where in your work have you seen this done well or have felt that cross-regional sharing would have made CB more successful? , Trust and legitimacy are key criteria for successful capacity building. Are there existing regionally focused organizations or partnerships that are under-utilized or under leveraged? What have been successful ways to connect across regions? , When we say “sustainable”—what features contribute to sustainability—and are these features the same everywhere? How can the sustainability of capacity building measures be ensured?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The panelists agreed that regions approach and operationalize capacity building differently in practical terms, however, it was also recognized that more cross-regional sharing would be beneficial where possible. Examples included interregional organisations (ASEAN, ECOWAS, EU) or more developed countries (Singapore) in certain regions sharing best practices and building capacities for lesser countries from the same region. Krey criteria for successful and sustainable capacity building comprise legitimacy, trust and respect, according to the panelists. Relationship building was also mentioned as an important contributing factor. However, panelists warned that one can only be as strong as the weakest link, therefore it makes sense to not only become stronger within your country, within your subregion. To really have a proper open, secure, safe system, one must really cooperate between regions. This would also help to address closing gaps between regions on CCB. Furthermore, national buy-in is essential. This would ensure reciprocity and a two-way street from with both partners benefit. 

However, it was also stressed that the differences among regions are significant (geography, economics, politics & culture) and best practices are not applicable to every region. The Pacific region was named as an example where countries differ enormously and best practice sharing would not be very successful. Lastly, another important criteria constituted the involvement of multiple partners for sustainable capacity building, which is still lacking in general. 

Overall, multistakeholder initatives such as the Paris Call for Trust and Stability in Cyberspace or multistakeholder organisations such as the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise were named as great platforms that could support on cyber capacity building across regions. Interregional fora such as the EU-India dialogue were cited as successful exchanges on CCB.

3. Key Takeaways

Trust, legitimacy and the involvement of all relevant stakeholders are the pillars for any benefitial capacity building project. The work of the GFCE was recognized as a great contribution and new partnerships with the private sector focusing on Africa seem to be promising. For the future, a focus on norms discussion amongst African states, the creation of a single universal trusted organisation on cyber capacity building and the standarised use of multistakeholder approaches were listed recommendations for the future. Furthermore, additional track 1.5-dialogues not only between countries but also regions or country and region (such as the EU) were recommended. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speakers:

Folake Olagunju, GFCE Advisory Board co-Chair & Program Officer of Internet and Cybersecurity, ECOWAS

Latha Reddy, Co-Chair of the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace

Bart Hogeveen, Head of Cyber Capacity Building, International Cyber Policy Centre, Australian Strategic Institute (ASPI)

Līga Raita Rozentāle, Senior Director for EU Cybersecurity and Emerging threats, Microsoft

moderated by Kerstin Vignard, Head, UNIDIR support team to General Assembly processes pursuant to resolutions 73/27 and 73/266

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session included several female speakers from four different continents, including developing regions. All speakers have represented different stakeholder groups throughout their careers in governments, think tanks, regional organizations, the private sector and civil society, so they have sat at different seats at the table. The content as such did not touch upon gender issues, however, the perspective of female professionals in this space allowed for a diverse view on the topic.

8. Session Outputs:

This workshop will be the first in a series of additional sessions in collaboration with the IGF. 

 

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #212 Learn from Home During COVID-19

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:16
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is the role of multi-stakeholders in the implementation of Learn from home due to COVID-19?, How could we close the digital divide under the new shifts in education within a country or region, and between developed and Less-developed countries?, What should be done to improve the digital literacy of the educators at individual, organizational, and governmental levels?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • During the pandemic, the use of various digital tools and platforms has visibly increased. The majority of the respondents indicated that they had discovered Zoom during the Lockdown.
  • Worldwide, 71% of young people between the age of 15-24 use the internet compared to 48% of the total population.
  • Digital divides also mirror prevailing economic gaps, inequalities exist between developed and underdeveloped countries.
  • A possible prolonged pandemic, and its multiple effects in the mental health well-being of individuals and communities.
  • We need a more inclusive but also standardised approach to digital competencies for all.
  • The crisis has exacerbated widespread educational inequalities due to factors relating to gender, immigration, or learning difficulties and special needs.
  • National education policies should mandate ministries and schools to provide digital literacy involved in the national education system.
  • Empower teachers, trainers and facilitators in the effective use of digital technologies.
  • Joint efforts between the Private Sector and Private Sector plays a crucial role in identifying and implementing technology-relevant approaches to resolve these challenges ensuring appropriateness and sustainability.
  • We have to train teachers in the use of digital tech not in using off suites and  software, but how to use this amazing kit and resources are available on it, to empower and enable young people and also with vocational training, older people, to learn.  So it's not just giving them digital skills but enabling them.
  • We can be much more positive and we can rethink education for the future and use of digital technologies, and make sure that in the future, when some pandemic occurs, we can move seamlessly into new resilient education systems that use digital technology to serve the interest of everybody.
3. Key Takeaways
  • Engaging multi-stakeholders through effective partnerships. Governments need to lead the process of systemic educational transformation.
  • The private sector should be valued primarily for its understanding of the technologies, its management expertise, and its focus on sustainability, rather than merely as a vehicle for providing additional funding or technological resources for education systems.
  • New public policies that can sustainably shape our world after the COVID-19 crisis.
  • Enabling access: building resilient infrastructures for education during a pandemic or disaster.
  • It is also necessary for both governments and businesses to work towards introducing policies to eradicate the digital divide in such a pandemic situation. They have to come up with shared principles, guidance and regulations to improve the infrastructure, content, and accessibility to every one.
  • This dynamic amelioration has triggered interest in various multi-stakeholders for proactive Connectivity, Content-production, and Accessibility. The governments, the private sector significantly impact supporting their civil society to stay home with digital connectivity and accessibility.
  • Governments and the private sector are undertaking many initiatives to support their nation and economies with digital inclusion addressing the digital divide, connectivity, and accessibility. Examples are,
  • Indonesian government initiatives target wider broadband coverage in Indonesia to remote islands. The Ministry of Education Indonesia gave subsidies for internet package to students for online education
  • Latin American governments incorporated different channels in order to facilitate teaching and learning. In Columbia, Ecuador, Peru and El Salvador governments have government programs on both television and public radio for students as well as through online platforms.
  • In Dominican, the government decided to increase public Wi-Fi access as a result. More than 1000 free public Wi-Fi access points have been set up to facilitate resource distribution.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  1. Tim Unwin 

Organization: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Stakeholder Group: Intergovernmental Organization 

Regional Group: Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

 

  1. Rilla Gusela Sumisra 

 

Organization: PT. Netmarks Indonesia / Internet Development Institute 

Stakeholder Group: Technical Community 

Regional Group: Asia-Pacific Group

 

  1. Veronica Stefan 

Organization: Council of Europe/ Digital Citizens Romania, Think-Tank 

Stakeholder Group: Civil Society 

Regional Group: Eastern European Group

  1. Paola Galvez

Organization: Niubox

Stakeholder Group: Private sector

Regional Group: Latin American and Caribbean Group

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

During the COVID-19 outbreak Issues concerned with the safety, security and privacy associated with digital technologies have surfaced throughout. There should be policy enforcement and guidance to help protect girls and women from all forms of abuse, bullying and harassment through digital technologies. Governments should ensure that girls have as equal access to digital technologies throughout the education system

8. Session Outputs:

The session contributed to increasing the interest of academia, along with the increasing number of studies and research in the organization of remote education which aims to learn from set-backsprevious mistakes and improve the efficiency of the e-learning system. In addition the speakers also published related materials as research publications local and global Internet Governance Organisation news and also educational sites, both in social media platforms and official websites. Some publications of speakers are listed below

Furthermore, There will be post on the social media platforms and official websites such as Internet Development Institute (local), APAC ICT Women, ISOC Chapters and Special Interest Groups (SIG), NetMission.Asia or Youth4IG (regional), a network of Youth IGF coordinators (global).This will increase the willingness of educators to handle future possible global emergencies as well as encourage other stakeholders such as the technical community to develop better learning platforms and incentivize researchers to develop quality education and learning tools with ICT in the future. We believe that education is the premise of progress in every society.

 

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #212 Learn from Home During COVID-19
10. Voluntary Commitment

Edmon Chung: "Talk to anyone who would listen especially schools, not forget about the zoom and the technology that you've learned and at least try to to come up with some kind of hybrid going on solution"

 

Paola Galvez: “I am committed to keep working hard to shape a better regulatory framework for a digital ecosystem and to put human being at the center".

 

Rilla Gusela Sumisra : "I hope that we can live better, keep health"

 

Tim Unwin: "Listen more speak less and post less on social media"

Veronica Stefan : "Engage young people in all these debates and whatever is following they are the biggest users the most affected they need the most important role at the table of the discussion"

IGF 2020 WS #216 Governance and Business Models for Inclusive Development

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:30
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #217 The role of digital tech. in environmental sustainability

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:49
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can the public and private sector work together to put into action the possible solutions to the problems raised by increased consumption of electricity and resources? What are the roadblocks in the way of boosting uptake and ensuring scalability of technologically enabled solutions to environmental problems? , How can rebound effects - the environmental impact caused by increased demand or consumption - be mitigated, and what role should all the actors in the ecosystem play to achieve this?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

- Participants agreed that the ICT sector can play a key enabling role in achieving environmental sustainability, including for example through next generation connectivity (5G technology, fibre networks), improve the operations of existing mobile and fixed networks, improve the energy efficiency of data centres, use of renewables in the sector. The use of data to inform sustainable policy decisions is a key aspect too.

- To boost innovation and to push digitalisation across sectors of society, it is important having the right pro-investment approach to support the private sector, for example to accelerate roll-out of 5G and fibre networks. Green financial aspects care crucial should be considered and incentivised.

- Rebound effects remain a considerable challenge, with increased energy consumption and higher demand risking to offset the gains made by more sustainable technologies 

- There are already many positive initiatives in place in both the public and private sectors, and these include governance structures, data sharing mechanisms, modelling and monitoring, smart cities, voluntary labelling, digitally enabled sustainable business models, and ensuring a sustainable supply chain 

- There are important common areas and fora for collaboration to achieve the aims of environmental sustainability, including digital imaging of the earth for monitoring, data sharing to enable the circular economy, accurate indicators, and the involvement of all actors in the ecosystem 

Participants also acknowledged the challenge that digital technologies can pose for the environment, including disproportionate distribution of e-waste, accentuating further the North-South divide 

3. Key Takeaways

Above all, the ICT sector can be an enabler for achieving environmental sustainability, and it can and should work in close cooperation with all levels of government to put in place technologies and mechanisms to achieve these aims. While there remain many problems with regard to rebound effects, insufficient sharing and use of dispersed and non-uniform data, knock-on effects (e.g. social and economic) in developing countries caused by unsustainable supply chains etc., there are many solutions.

The most important take-away is the challenge that faces all actors in the ecosystem, namely how to encourage the uptake of technologies to reduce environmental impact, and how to ensure the scalability of these solutions in order to guarantee that their positive impact is felt. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Beat Estermann, Bern University of Applied Sciences
Speaker 1: Sara Ghazanfari, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Andrea Halmos, Intergovernmental Organization, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: Natasa Perucica, Civil Society, Eastern European Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not the subject of this discussion, however the panel was very well gender-balanced. 

8. Session Outputs:

The workshop identified and created an understanding of the broad range of opportunities the ICT sector can provide to reach environmental sustainability. Many of those initiatives were already in place, but panellists agreed on the need to create an ecosystem to boost those opportunities and leverage the ICT enabling potential.

The ICT sector is indeed a catalyst and sustainability enabler for reaching ambitious climate targets. However, without the right pro-investment policy framework, it will not be possible to reap the digital contribution to sustainability.

Panellists exchanged also around the need from policy makers and Governments to facilitate the interaction with the industry and increase the stakeholder engagement.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #219 Co-Designing policies for a sustainable digital industry

Updated: Thu, 02/09/2021 - 16:25
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Can we quantify the environmental impact of the digital transition?, How could we reduce the negative impact of the digital transition?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There is currently a lack of data and regulations to measure the environmental impact of the digital transition (few data are measured and/or provided).

Addictive design could stimulate a higher consumption caused by degital services and content.

Policies regulating the environmental impact of ICT should be adapted to the different countries.

 

3. Key Takeaways

First of all, the speaker Ananya Singh, an economic scientist & internet governance, detailed the role of ICT in the context of sustainable development. Then, Annie Blandin, Professor of Law, IMT Atlantique presented the roadmap of the French Digital Council on digital technologies and environment and the context of its elaboration. Esther Sandrine Ngom, Lawyer, President, Internet Society Cameroon Chapter, talked about the public policies on digital and environment in Cameroon and finally Pierre Bonis, Executive Director, AFNIC, illustrated the workshop with the concrete example of sustainability of  domain name system.

For the second round table, the speakers gave their point of view on a call for voluntary actions or pledges to forward the goals of Internet Governance and the Digital Cooperation Roadmap and they discussed about commitments and recommendations to improve policies for a sustainable digital industry. More particularly Ananya Singh synthesized the subjects that policymakers must keep in mind when framing policies to promote rapid digitization without causing irreparable damage to the environment. Annie Blandin talked about the work of the French Digital Council on data of general interest and how such data could foster a sustainable digital industry. The data of general interest are defined as private data whose opening is justified by a goal of public interest, especially with regard to environmental data. Pierre Bonis presents the projects which could be elaborated on for further evaluate and improve the energy use of a DNS request. The speakers then answer the questions of the public.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Lucient Castex (Moderator)

Ananya Singh

Annie Blandin

Ether Sandrine Ngom

Pierre Bonis

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #231 Youth&Sustainability: Creating change through collaboration

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:12
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can we foster multi-stakeholder collaboration on digital sustainability?, How can information on the climate crisis, environmental justice, and the sustainability effects of the Internet be effectively communicated?
, How do different stakeholders and regions approach the discourse around digital sustainability?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Advocacy: It is acknowledged that youth movements have been drivers of the environmental justice discourse, however in Internet Governance spaces, youth have not been as active in the discussion. However, the call to action can only be realised with resources for campaigns etc., so these movements often leave out marginalised groups.

Regulation: There was agreement that regulation is a key factor in fostering sustainability, so legislative bodies should be take into account scientific findings, as well as civil society advocacy. It was also agreed on that political decision makers have not yet fully formed action plans, or the ones that are put out are not ambitious enough given the urgency of environmental action.

Innovation: It was a call to the private sector to foster innovation that is environmentally friendly and fair in order to pro-actively address environmental challenges. It was also agreed on that businesses and start-ups should be active parts of policy deliberation, as they are the stakeholders to then implement measures. It was concluded that the Internet Governance approach to multi-stakeholder processes can be a model for digital sustainability.

Eurocentricity: It was brought up by the panel that, currently, the discourse around environmental justice, and digital sustainability specifically, is dominated by a euocentric focus. However, Asian and African initiatives were presented, and there was agreement that there needs to be more interregional policy dialogue in order not to reinforce inequalities.

Transfer: Overall, there was agreement that both youth movements for environmental justice, and Internet Governance fora address different stakeholders. In order to implement digital sustainability in Internet governance spaces, it requires clear advocacy, effective communication, and the inclusion of scientific stakeholders. Youth movements for sustainability, such as Fridays for Future, should be invited to participate in multistakeholder environments such as the IGF.

 

3. Key Takeaways

In this session, different stakeholders (government, technical community, civil society) deliberated on approaches and challenges in order to find lasting synergies between Internet Governance processes, and environmental movements as they intersect on the topic of digital sustainability. Youth initiatives in both policy spaces are important, but often not fully integrated in policy development.

It became clear that on a political level, there are still no clear, ambitious action plans to address urgent issues such as the emissions of data centers, destruction of habitats due to illegal online trade, and e-waste. While nationally and regionally, legislative and high-level policy processes might pave the way on some of those issues, international multi-stakeholder deliberation is missing. The Internet Governance model of multi-stakeholder engagement could be a roof under which to foster the exchange on the topic of environmental sustainability. However, this means that there have to be intersessional processes that decidedly include all stakeholder groups, as the discussions at the IGF2020 are a mere starting point.

High-level stakeholders need to commit to also consult the scientific community, as well as civil society movements on environmental justice. As these have been driven by youth in many cases, young people need to be included on eye-level, instead of a tokenistic appearance.

The digital private sector needs to also be a strong partner in the progression of the theme, as innovation and implementation for digital sustainability measures depend on digital businesses and their practices.

Civil society needs to foster the critical masses and the heightened interest for environmental sustainability, while internally diversifying and actively overcoming Eurocentric narratives.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Raphael Reimann

Rasmus Andresen

Lily Edinam Botsyoe

Edmon Chung

Josaphat Tjiho

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The extent of reflections regarding gender pertained to the lack of women in decision-making positions on the one hand, and their relative disadvantages in civil society initiativeses on the other. It was noted that both high-level and grassroot processes need to be diverse in order to address digital sustainability in all its aspects.

Due to unaivalabilities of speakers, the panel was not balanced in terms of gender. A fact which definitely shall be rectified in the follow-up processes.

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #231 Youth&Sustainability: Creating change through collaboration
10. Voluntary Commitment

All panelists pledged to further engage their networks to foster intergenerational, transnational, and multi-stakeholder policy development regarding digital sustainability, especially in the context of Internet governance.

IGF 2020 WS #234 Security of digital products: Industry and enhancing trust

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:06
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #236 Data flows, Trade and International Cooperation

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • Privacy laws and regulations, such as the Convention 108 of the Council of Europe, have been designed to facilitate data flows. These normative frameworks contribute to international trade by enabling companies to move data across borders.
  • Although there are strong commonalities between privacy norms, there are a variety of different mechanisms in place to transfer data across borders. Work on interoperability between these data transfer models is ongoing and will further contribute to data flows and trade.
  • For a data privacy law to be successful, it must provide effective protection for individuals, and, at the same time, it should provide organisations with the freedom to operate, innovate and comply in a way that makes sense for their business models.
  • Moving copies of data is no longer the only way to create value from that data. Decentralized artificial intelligence permits to generate insights from different sources of data without requiring access to these data, thus guaranteeing privacy and security. Technology will increasingly provide regulatory compliant solutions to many of the issues related with data protection.
  • The Internet is composed of five fundamental components, and any government measures that undermine one of these elements affects the entire Internet infrastructure. These components consist of an open and accessible global infrastructure with a common protocol; common IP identifiers; an open architecture to guarantee interoperability; a decentralized routing management allowing optimized costs; a general purpose rather than a specialized so the Internet can adapt to its evolving community of users and applications.
  • Data localisation requirements, for instance, undermine the decentralized routing management of the Internet. Also, aligning routing policy with the requirements of different jurisdictions creates needless complexity and inefficiency, as routing could no longer employ the technical features that generate connectivity, resilience, and optimized flow

 

3. Key Takeaways
  • Privacy laws and regulations, such as the Convention 108 of the Council of Europe, have been designed to facilitate data flows. These normative frameworks contribute to international trade by enabling companies to move data across borders.
  • Although there are strong commonalities between privacy norms, there are a variety of different mechanisms in place to transfer data across borders. Work on interoperability between these data transfer models is ongoing and will further contribute to data flows and trade.
  • For a data privacy law to be successful, it must provide effective protection for individuals, and, at the same time, it should provide organisations with the freedom to operate, innovate and comply in a way that makes sense for their business models.
  • Moving copies of data is no longer the only way to create value from that data. Decentralized artificial intelligence permits to generate insights from different sources of data without requiring access to these data, thus guaranteeing privacy and security. Technology will increasingly provide regulatory compliant solutions to many of the issues related with data protection.
  • The Internet is composed of five fundamental components, and any government measures that undermine one of these elements affects the entire Internet infrastructure. These components consist of an open and accessible global infrastructure with a common protocol; common IP identifiers; an open architecture to guarantee interoperability; a decentralized routing management allowing optimized costs; a general purpose rather than a specialized so the Internet can adapt to its evolving community of users and applications.
  • Data localisation requirements, for instance, undermine the decentralized routing management of the Internet. Also, aligning routing policy with the requirements of different jurisdictions creates needless complexity and inefficiency, as routing could no longer employ the technical features that generate connectivity, resilience, and optimized flow.

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #247 ICTs, SDGs, and Existing Data Gaps for Measuring Progress

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:54
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the main challenges in the production of quality, timely data, and an effective and inclusive national data system?, What should be the roles and responsibilities for individuals in producing quality and timely data?, What is the role of incentives in data governance at the local and national levels?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • Cost of data
  • Trust issues when data sharing
  • Incentives to encourage data collection
  • Privacy and security of data
  • Roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders
  • Disaggregation of data - gender 
3. Key Takeaways

 

 Roles and responsibilities

  • Governments must choose to allocate resources to invest in data systems, choose to develop the regulatory and legal frameworks to promote the safe sharing of data and the protection of rights, and create a culture for the routine use of data in decision-making and accountability. Governments should also lead by example, making all public data open by default while respecting privacy and confidentiality conditions
  • Companies have to choose to share their data in an accessible and affordable manner, and use it to make decisions that advance the SDGs.
  • Civil society leaders need to amplify people’s voices in the data they collect and use for social change at a local level.
  • There must be collaborating with UN agencies, NGOs, and the private sector to create a picture of progress on the SDGs.
  • Academic institutions and think tanks play a role in supporting methodological testing and analysis of gender data for insight
  • National statistics offices are crucial partners for improving efforts to collect and disseminate nationally representative data.
  • In terms of data governance, chief statisticians should push for the UNSC to extend its role and become a more inclusive international platform for data sharing and coordination.

Incentives are necessary to catalyze multi-stakeholder collaboration. We need to create a new incentive structure and infrastructure to encourage private actors who currently monopolize digital technologies to share their information, thereby overcoming data and digital asymmetries between countries and between the private and public sectors. A key component of this incentive structure would be private company access to public data, which they could better understand new markets and opportunities, while concurrently ensuring the protection of privacy and confidentiality. One important approach is to establish good practice coalitions and platforms to make international data sources, methods, and innovations more standardized and accessible across countries

 

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Anne Delaporte, Insights Manager, Connected Women Programme, GSMA

Lorrayne Porciuncula, Economist/ Policy Analyst on Communications Infrastructure and Services at the Digital Economy and Policy Division, OECD

Antonio Garcia ZaballosLead Specialist, Technology, Inter-American Development Bank

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
  • Disaggregated data is important to get a sense of the specific fields that require support
  • There are numerous reasons for persistent gender data gaps. These include low prioritization, low resources or capacity driving a low country coverage in gender data collection efforts; poorly developed or non-existent international standards for data used to construct indicators; the complexity of monitoring systems needed to capture desired gender data and indicators; most data collected at household rather than individual level
  • Civil registration data, which includes births, death, and causes of death, marriage and divorce, are critical for a number of health and civic initiatives
8. Session Outputs:

 

  1. Why is data important?
  • Too many people are invisible in data and therefore invisible in decision-making. Setting policies without core information or timely analysis means resources are wasted and their impact is limited.
    • Lack of timely and comprehensive data also means that investors do not have all the information needed to target financial investments to promote sustainable development
  • Data is critical for gathering a sense of how well we are doing in meeting certain targets fundamental in creating initiatives- cannot create functional and effective initiatives without the proper data
  • A significant lack of data has corresponded to a lack of investment toward achieving the environmental dimension of the SDGs
  • There are not only social and environmental benefits, but also economic benefits from well-function data systems.
    • It would not only appeal to national governments and multilateral investors, but also to private and philanthropic investors looking to build systems with maximum social, environmental, and economic returns
  1. What are the main challenges in the production of quality, timely data, and an effective and inclusive national data system?
  • Many countries do not have national systems in place for producing and monitoring data.
  • Public fears, lack of regulation, and lack of leadership mean that many governments and NGOs are not applying the power of data for decision-making, data is being abused, and companies are hoarding vast data resources.
    • Data is used in ways that reduce public trust, rather than serving the public good
  • Big data analysis also raises challenges concerning data privacy and security, while governments and other stakeholders will need to build capacity and resources to maximize its value.
  1.  What should be the objectives among a broad set of actors occurring across all stages of the data process in producing quality and timely data?
  • Governments must choose to allocate resources to invest in data systems, choose to develop the regulatory and legal frameworks to promote the safe sharing of data and the protection of rights, and create a culture for the routine use of data in decision-making and accountability.
    • Governments should also lead by example, making all public data open by default while respecting privacy and confidentiality conditions
  • Companies have to choose to share their data in an accessible and affordable manner, and use it to make decisions that advance the SDGs. Data collected and reported by multilateral organizations and other international development partners must be harnessed and leveraged
  • Civil society leaders need to amplify people’s voices in the data they collect and use for social change at a local level.
  • There must be collaborating with UN agencies, NGOs, and the private sector to create a picture of progress on the SDGs
  • Academic institutions and think tanks play a role in supporting methodological testing and analysis of gender data for insight
  • National statistics offices are crucial partners for improving efforts to collect and disseminate nationally representative data. They should demonstrate the value of collecting data and improve their capacity to communicate information to program and policy decision-makers in a timely manner
  • In terms of data governance, chief statisticians, in their capacity as members of the UN Statistical Commission (UNSC), should push for the UNSC to extend its role and become a more inclusive international platform for data sharing and coordination. The UNSC needs to build trust and common cause among official and unofficial data providers, specifically around data gaps and capacity challenges
  1. What is the role of incentives of internet stakeholders in data governance at the local and national levels?
  • Incentives are necessary to catalyze multi-stakeholder collaboration.
  • In particular, we need to create a new incentive structure and infrastructure to encourage private actors who currently monopolize digital technologies to share their information, thereby overcoming data and digital asymmetries between countries and between the private and public sectors      
  • A key component of this incentive structure would be private company access to public data, with which they could better understand new markets and opportunities, while concurrently ensuring the protection of privacy and confidentiality
  • One important approach is to establish good practice coalitions and platforms to make international data sources, methods, and innovations more standardized and accessible across countries
  • Another incentive is frontier technologies and their support for safer systems for data sharing
    • satellite and drone data are being integrated with other sources of data to map ecosystem extent; satellite imagery and telecommunications data are being combined with census records to produce more accurate and timely population, migration, infrastructure, and housing estimates; and telecommunication and sensor data are being used to track informal commuter patterns, transport systems, and economic opportunities.
    • BUT the majority of these new technologies and approaches are being used exclusively by private industries and, to a lesser extent, academic institutions, largely in the Global North
    • We need to move towards a system that enables the equitable sharing and exchange of technology for the public good
  • a new social contract among companies, governments, and citizens where mutual obligations and responsibilities are spelled out
    • Multiple benefits and also provides a degree of incentiv
  1. Why is the disaggregation of data important? What are the key gender data gaps, and what actions can different stakeholders take to bridge the gender data gap?
  • Disaggregated data is important to get a sense of the specific fields that require support
  • There are numerous reasons for persistent gender data gaps. These include low prioritization, low resources or capacity driving a low country coverage in gender data collection efforts; poorly developed or non-existent international standards for data used to construct indicators; and challenges brought by the complexity of monitoring systems needed to capture desired gender data and indicators.
  • Disaggregation remains a key challenge across sectors as most data are collected at household rather than individual level
  • Civil registration data, which includes births, death, and causes of death, as well as marriage and divorce, are critical for a number of health (as well as civic) initiatives
  • Women over reproductive age; our poor understanding of whether education is preparing girls with the digital literacy skills necessary for the future of work; our partial picture of women’s political engagement; and the nascent field studying the interplay of environmental issues and gender.
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #252 Connected Health in the Post-Covid-19 Era

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:12
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What does a successful statutory and regulatory regime look like when it comes to empowering positive uses of connected health technologies, and what does success look like in terms of preventing some of the downsides?, What is the best way to bridge the digital divide that threatens to leave some outside of the positive advances made in digital health? , What are the opportunities and risks of supplementing traditional healthcare with AI-powered analytics tools?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • What about current connected health use-cases is encouraging and what do still needs to be addressed?

  • Whether this is a trend that should or will last beyond the public health crisis.

    • The panel agreed that the trend will last and has plenty of positives.

  • How much are the current AI use cases in healthcare built on "hype" and how much are real benefits to patients.

    • Panelists agreed there are many positive use-cases, but there needs to be care taken to ensure that policymakers continue to be skeptical, instead of "cheering on" AI uncritically.

  • The need for human intervention into AI systems.

  • The additional privacy and security threats that the provision of healthcare over the internet brings.

    • Panelists agreed on the existence of a new threat but disagreed about the solutions to mitigate them.

  • The inclusivity challenges that arise when healthcare is provided over the internet.

    • Panelists offered several different solutions, including broad-based technology education campaigns and universal broadband deployment.

3. Key Takeaways

The panel was able to identify and create an understanding of the spectrum of opportunities and challenges that telehealth will bring to bear on communities during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The panel discssed how the identified opportunities and challenges may be mitigated by the socioeconomic factors of discreet communities. For example, rural patients in the global south have less opportunity to benefit from connected health interventions due to lack of access to smartphones, broadband, and health providers who are willing to adopt the technology.

Panelists reached agreement that broadband access, legacy regulatory approaches, interoperability, technological literacy issues, privacy and security risks, and immature technology (from an AI diagnostics perspective) are all challenges. However, panelists also agreed that the opportunities that connected health presents are immense: greater penetration into underserved markets, more personalized care, optimizing new and existing data flows, and allowing for greater regional resource sharing are all ways that connected health can help improve patient outcomes. 

Panelists offered several different solutions to help mitigate some of the challenges, including broad-based technology education campaigns, universal broadband deployment, and bridging the divide between policymakers and technologists.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Brian Scarpelli, ACT | The App Association

Speaker 1: Sveatoslav Vizitiu , Private Sector, Eastern European Group
Speaker 2: Jelena Malinina , Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: Subbarao Kambhampati, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Analia Baum, Government, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 5: Geralyn Miller, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #252 Connected Health in the Post-Covid-19 Era
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #254 The interaction of platform content moderation & geopolitics

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:33
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How do the variety of political, and regulatory contexts shape the different ways in which content moderation decisions and enforcement of community standards take place on platforms? , What kind of formal and informal arrangements have developed between digital platforms and governments to limit the proliferation of state-backed misinformation/ disinformation, hate speech, and violent or terrorist content?, What are the opportunities/ limitations associated with proposals for fostering greater transparency and accountability in enforcement of platform content moderation standards?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Pratik Sinha, Alt News

Marianne Diaz, Derechos Digitales

Amelie Pia Heldt, Hans Bredow Institute

Varun Reddy, Facebook-India 

Tarleton Gillespie, Microsoft Research, Cornell University

Urvan Parfentyev, Russian Association of Electronic Communications

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #255 Digital (In)accessibility and Universal Design

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:44
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is the current situation (policy, implementation, practice) of ICT accessibility in Low- and Middle-income countries (LMIC)?, What could be arguments for and actions of different stakeholders to promote Universal Design and digital inclusion of people with disabilities?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad support/agreement:

  • Designing ICT inclusively from the start following the principles of Universal Design will ultimately benefit everyone through increased usability/user-friendliness.
  • Including persons with disabilities and other marginalized groups in digital development efforts is vital for reaching the SDGs.
  • The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital exclusion and underscored the need to develop inclusive solutions.
  • A lack of awareness about accessibility and its social and business benefits is regarded as a major obstacle in all stakeholder groups: governments, private actors, civil society organizations. Among persons with disabilities there is a lack of awareness about accessibility features and insufficient skills for their usage.
  •  A lack of disaggregated data about persons with disabilities, also with regard to ICT challenges and opportunities creates an enormous challenge for designing and implementing policies. Better data could also be an incentive for the private sector.
  • Cognitive disabilities are to be treated differently with regard to accessibility. Care-givers or family members should be involved to identify their needs.
  • Perspective on digtial accessibility needs to change: Shifting away from a perception of an extra effort and special intervention. Normalizing inclusive design for all should be the goal.

Areas of no agreement/areas needing further discussion and development

  • What role does innovation play for digital inclusion of persons wiht disabilities? Differing perspectives: Innovation alone does not solve crucial matters of social exclusion, but can be a valuable approach for convincing the private sector.
  • What means accessibility for persons with different types of disabilities?
3. Key Takeaways

A lack of awareness about accessibility and its social and business benefits is regarded as a major obstacle in all stakeholder groups: governments, private actors, civil society organizations. Among persons with disabilities there is a lack of awareness about accessibility features and insufficient skills for their usage. Including persons with disabilities and other marginalized groups in digital development efforts is vital for reaching the SDGs. The perception of governments, private actors and international organizations on disability in tech needs to change: designing ICT inclusively from the start following the principles of Universal Design will ultimately benefit everyone through increased usability/user-friendliness.  Governments have often times committed themselves to accessibility of ICT through signing and ratifying the Convention on the Rights for Persons with Disabilities, but implementation is lacking. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital exclusion and underscored the need to develop inclusive solutions.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator 1: Edith Kimani, Media & Journalist

Moderator 2: Paul Horsters, Second facilitator

Speaker 1: Wairagala Wakabi, Civil Society, African Group

Speaker 2: Tim Unwin, Intergovernmental Organization, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 3: Bernard Chiira, Technical Community, African Group

Speaker 4:  Irene Mbari-Kirika, Civil Society, African Group

Speaker 5: Claire Sibthorpe, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 6: Dr. Bernd Schramm Head of GIZ Global Project Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities commissioned by the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). Short welcoming speech.

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

3 of the 6 panelists are women. Tim Unwins engagement for changing mens perception about women in tech was mentioned, apart from this gender issues were not discussed.

8. Session Outputs:

Kindly find this under 2) and 3)

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #259 Building Inclusive Digital Economies in Emerging Markets

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:35
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How are entrepreneurs and small businesses, particularly across the Global South, affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and how digital economy can support their survival and recovery? , What policy barriers to participation in the digital economy, exposed by the COVID-19 crisis, are entrepreneurs urgently facing?, At a local or international level, how can local businesses communities, civil society, government, and multilateral institutions work together to develop a common policy frameworks and other approaches for inclusive digital economies?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

This session identified key barriers that businesses are facing when reopening during the COVID-19 crisis and transitioning to the digital economy. For instance, entrepreneurs and small businesses across emerging markets are struggling to participate in the digital economy due to existing challenges of accessibility and affordability of the internet as well as a lack of digital skills. At the same time, inadequate or absent policies and regulatory frameworks that facilitate competitiveness and access to global markets continue to undermine the development of an inclusive digital economy. To address these challenges, multi-stakeholder dialogues on digital transformation at the local, regional, and international levels must be a key priority to ensure inclusive digitally-enabled economic growth in the post-COVID-19 era.

3. Key Takeaways

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of building enabling environments for inclusive prosperity in a technology-reliant future. Moreover, there is a broad consensus that multi-stakeholder coordination underpins the development of a digital space that advances democratic values and economic inclusion. Stakeholder groups such as civil society, international organizations, the technical community, companies, and governments should work together to support initiatives that improve digital and financial skills among local business communities. Diverse actors should also actively participate in policy fora focused on the development and implementation of legislation and frameworks that impact the digital economy.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Anna Kompanek, Center for International Private Enterprise

Online Moderator: Morgan Frost, Center for International Private Enterprise

Speaker 1: Rainer Heufers, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: Mary Rose Ofianga, Private Sector, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 3: Juliet Nanfuka, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 4: Nicole Primmer, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session explored specific barriers that women are facing when seeking to participate in the digital economy. Overall, the pandemic aggravated pre-existing gaps of the digital divide, which disproportionately affect women. The speakers agreed that since the COVID-19 pandemic, women are becoming more entrepreneurial as they transition businesses online. Yet, many women entrepreneurs still lack the digital and financial skills needed to participate fully in the digital economy. In addition, inadequate or misguided legislation on the digital economy undermines the advancement of gender inclusion in the digital space. 

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #259 Building Inclusive Digital Economies in Emerging Markets
10. Voluntary Commitment

During the session, panelists made voluntary commitments to continue contributing to multi-stakeholder conversations focused on building inclusive digital economies. For instance, Rainer Heufers stated that the Center for Indonesian Policy Studies (CIPS) will continue to look at issues impacting the digital economy and actively participate in policy dialogues focused on digital transformation in Indonesia. Likewise, Juliet Nanfuka from the Collaboration on International ICT Policy in East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) said that her organization will continue to encourage diverse stakeholders to participate in policy fora impacting the digital space. The recent passing of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), provides unique opportunities for diverse stakeholders to advance dialogue across Africa on how to shape and govern the digital economy in a way that promotes greater regional cohesion, development, and competitiveness. Mary Rose Ofianga Rontal mentioned that she will continue to equip local entrepreneurs in the Philippines, many of whom are women, with digital skills needed to make the digital economy inclusive. Finally, Nicole Primmer highlighted that the Business at Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) will continue to develop research, tools, and best practices on the digital economy that are applicable around the world as governments and other stakeholders continue to explore policy options.

IGF 2020 WS #260 COVID-19 “Dis-infodemic”: Challenges, lessons, opportunities

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:40
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What actions can governments take to counter disinformation while ensuring access to information and protection of freedom of expression?, How can tech companies moderate the spread of false content on their platforms, while providing transparency, accountability and possibility for redress?, What role do fact-checkers and media play in countering disinformation, and how can their work be strengthened?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The panel featured representatives from the tech sector, civil society, academia, NGOs, as well as WHO and UNESCO.

Speakers agreed that there is a crucial need to foster multi-stakeholder partnerships and cross-sectoral collaboration, to ensure that the Internet remains an open space for the exchange of reliable information.

Julie Posetti (ICFJ) summarized the types of COVID-19 disinformation and responses to the current “disinfodemic”, based on her contributions to the Broadband Commission’s report “Balancing Act” and two UNESCO policy briefs.

Tina Purnat (WHO) called for crafting a public research agenda to manage and respond to both infodemics and disinfodemics.

Beeban Kidron (5Rights Foundation) underlined the relevance of such research, arguing that disinformation types cannot be separated from one another and have an encompassing impact on a multitude of crises, including on children’s wellbeing.

Guy Berger (UNESCO) stressed the need to understand cultural aspects of information as part of a human condition which includes norms, emotion, fear, aspirations, identities, and culture. Piotr Dmochowski-Lipski (EUTELSAT IGO) stressed that national interpretations could negatively impact the efficacy of policy-making processes and international standards.

Stephen Turner (Twitter) presented Twitter’s recent content moderation decisions that were made with the intention to detect and delete harmful content concerning COVID-19, based upon the challenges such content presents, and how users interact with it. He also presented Twitter’s partnerships with international organizations such as UNESCO on issues of media and information literacy.

Cristina Tardáguila (IFCN) pointed to social media platforms developing disinformation policies only for selected countries. She advocated for more work in designing global approaches to disinformation in the online sphere, as well as a focus on information literacy.

Claire Wardle (First Draft News) advocated for more qualitative research in the field in order to strengthen the empirical foundation on which to base actions against disinformation.

3. Key Takeaways

The session found consensus on two main points. Firstly, it was recognized that all stakeholders have stakes and potential in shaping Internet governance. All groups represented in the panel pushed for increased cooperation on the issue of disinformation, in order to produce a holistic assessment framework.

Secondly, they agreed that communities and individuals are both essential to designing and implementing initiatives that address disinformation while strengthening media and information literacy. This is particularly relevant in the context of the COVID-19 disinfodemic, in which information has life-or-death consequences for vulnerable populations.

Overall, speakers appear to agree to a varying extent that online platforms play an essential role in the spread of both disinformation and reliable information. The academia and civil society representatives were vocal about the need for platforms to be subject to independent regulatory oversight. They also encouraged online providers to pursue transparency and accountability when conceiving and applying their content moderation and removal strategies.

More doubts were raised concerning some possibilities to empower media outlets. There was discussion of how the business model employed by online platforms puts traditional news providers at a clear disadvantage. One speaker questioned whether online platforms are “fit for purpose” as they have become predilected vehicles of disinformation. Therefore, all participating groups would benefit from continued discussion on this aspect to better define potential solutions.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Guy Berger, UNESCO, International Organization

Presenter: Julie Posetti, International Centre for Journalists, Academia, Western European and Others Group

Speaker 1: Tina Purnat, WHO, Intergovernmental Organization
Speaker 2: Beeban Kidron, 5Rights Foundation, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group
Speaker 3: Piotr Dmochowski-Lipski, EUTELSAT IGO, Intergovernmental Organization, Eastern European Group Speaker 4: Claire Wardle, First Draft News, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group
Speaker 5: Stephen Turner, Twitter, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group
Speaker 6: Cristina Tardáguila, International Fact-Checking Network, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session focused on a series of technical and partnership solutions to the issues of disinformation, including the perspective of an array of internet governance stakeholders. Therefore, gender issues were not explicitly mentioned in the debate. However, the session showcased gender balance, with five out of eight panelists being women.

9. Group Photo
Panel for IGF 2020 Workshop #260 "Disinfodemic: Challenges, Lessons, Opportunities"
10. Voluntary Commitment

No voluntary commitments were made during the session.

IGF 2020 WS #266 Sustainable #netgov By Design: Environment & Human Rights

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:31
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How to reconcile environmental sustainability technological innovation and ensure that these are harmoniously intertwined with human rights frameworks in order to achieve the SGDs?, How can the Internet Governance community in general and the IGF in particular create spaces for cross-sectoral collaboration to accelerate the development of rights-based and environmentally sustainable Internet technologies?, How can consumers, individuals, communities, and institutions be encouraged to consider the environmental impact of their own internet access and use habits?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The discussion focused on the interconnections between human rights, environment and Internet connected technologies and looked into concrete steps to achieve an effective multi-stakeholder collaborative effort to ensure human rights and sustainability by design.

 

The speakers agreed that only concerted solutions resulting from multi-stakeholder collaboration could lead to effective change and that more needs to be done to promote dialogue and shared experiences, but that spaces, such as the annual IGF and the NRIs already exist to foster this dialogue.

 

The panel reflected upon the causes that are currently hindering cross sector collaboration – since the solutions and the skills for a sustainable ICT already exist, but are scattered among the different stakeholder groups – and highlighted issues of culture, values, and priorities. In particular, they highlighted the lack of accountability and the failure to take responsibility, which leads to masking problems rather than solving them. Also stressed was the scattered and unclear information on sustainability, the lack of a concerted strategy of repairability, and the reliance on a business model that promotes rampant consumption and product obsolescence, which forces consumers to waste their existing and perfectly working products by replacing them for new ones. This scenario is leading to ever growing  demand of consumption and of e-waste generation and the use of precious natural resources that not only have a  huge negative impact on the sustainability of the planet, but also on the full enjoyment of human rights with disastrous consequences to populations affected by the scarcity of their natural resources, affected by the hazards of e-waste, or working in degrading conditions to provide the raw materials needed for the ever growing  demand of production of new technologies.

3. Key Takeaways
  • A better governance on ICT sustainability is needed. Multi-stakeholder collaboration is vital for effective solutions, and the IGF environment is perfect to foster robust networks and to promote closer collaboration among stakeholders. Effective collaboration is key to avoid siloed decisions, to promote the development of informed policy frameworks and create a space for sharing good practices that promote rights and sustainability by design.
  • Regulatory frameworks are needed to ensure sustainability, from the use of natural resources design and production to the consumption and disposal of technologies. It is vital to provide clear and accessible information to consumers of internet technologies. For example, eco-design directive already exists within the EU and a Digital Sustainability Index is in development and it will be integrated in public procurement.
  • The private sector and the technical community need to lead the way by including life cycle assessment experts in all teams and ensuring and promoting human rights and sustainability by design.
  • Civil society has an important role of contributing to change through education and raising awareness in their communities so that communities can find their voice and demand the change needed.
  • Education is a key element in promoting sustainability and informed choices. A holistic approach that takes into account planetary boundaries and fosters life cycle perspective of rather than the existing linear perspective needs to be embedded into education and promoted by both civil societies and governments. Education should not only be provided to younger generations, but also to those in positions of power.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Weronika Koralewska, Civil Society, Poland
Alexandra Lutz, Government, European Parliament
Pia Wiche, Private Sector, EcoEd
Y. Z. Ya’u, Civil Soceity, APC / Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender was not explicitly covered, but was referenced via the adverse affects of the lack of sustainability built into the design of ICTs on the environment and human rights. All speakers, minus one, were also women.

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #266 Sustainable #netgov
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #267 Universal Acceptance of Domain Names and Email Addresses

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:15
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What measures would motivate the technical community to prioritize the UA support in their tools and services, given the potential socio-economic impact for the end-users?

What measures would motivate the technical community to prioritize the UA support in their tools and services, given the potential socio-economic impact for the end-users?

What measures would motivate the technical community to prioritize the UA support in their tools and services, given the potential socio-economic impact for the end-users?
What measures would motivate the technical community to prioritize the UA support in their tools and services, given the potential socio-economic impact for the end-users?

What measures would motivate the technical community to prioritize the UA support in their tools and services, given the potential socio-economic impact for the end-users?, How should the public sector address its practice and policy to incorporate UA readiness in its e-government services to better serve its citizens?, How can the end-user community organize to motivate the public sector and technology developers to promote inclusion and choice by allowing UA for all domain names and email addresses?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Supply side

  • The biggest expansions for creating customer choice and competition in the Domain Name Space have been the introduction of Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and the new gTLD program by ICANN
  • Every developer should have strong understanding of UA in their skills set giving them a competitive advantage.
  • There is power in standardization and interoperability for businesses who want to operate globally
  • Governments could lead by example by supporting e-government services and systems in local
  • The Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) within ICANN has already made a working group on UA issues.
  • Through the Universal Acceptance Steering Group (UASG) and ICANN, efforts have been made to further advance UA but it has not been enough
  • The introduction of Hindi email addresses by the local government of Rajasthan, India, has led to be able to communicate directly with 7 million people who had ASCII email addresses but were unable to operate them

Demand side

  • UA is a tool for end-users to enrich their online experiences
  • Awareness can be raised by targeting and doing outreach towards specific groups, such as governments or local initiatives. Local and regional applications would benefit local and regional users
  • Targeted capacity building could be offered on how the DNS works and operates, and why UA is relevant.
  • UA could also be integrated in university courses for social sciences, internet governance, international relations and computer sciences
  • Despite over 2 million registered domain names in China, most browsers, social media and messaging platforms do not support IDNs making their use not practical as potential traffic and customers might be lost
  • Chinese Domain Names Initiative (CDNI) was founded in January 2020 by registries, registrars, industry associates and internet companies to promote a better understanding of UA and move froward together.

 

 

3. Key Takeaways

Approaches and solutions towards raising awareness of the benefits of UA are multifold. The main challenge seems to be a lack of knowledge among the technical community and end-users about the existence of UA. There is a need to change the attitude of stakeholders towards UA implementation and realization of a truly multilingual internet and invest in long-term social and economic benefits. Overall, a multistakeholder effort is needed for both the supply-side and demand-sides to work in cooperation. Keeping the internet secure, stable and interoperable should be at the forefront of every long-term decision taken by all relevant stakeholders.

 

From the suppliers’ perspective, developers, major internet companies and other technical actors need to understand and prioritize UA readiness. Through technical training and other awareness raising initiatives, the private sector could be made to see the long-term financial and technical benefits of UA and close the communication gap between domain name markets and popular internet applications. Furthermore, UA should in collaboration with academia and universities, be incorporated in educational degrees before workers reach the job-market. 

The public sector has a major role to play in the awareness raising and adoption of UA. Leading by example, the public sector can drive UA readiness by providing internationalized domains and email addresses on their webpages to their citizens in local languages and scripts. Through procurement, the public sector can also accelerate the adoption of UA by technical partners through UA-friendly policies.

From the end-user perspective, there is a need for more education on the existence and possibilities provided by UA. Diverse approaches can be adopted in promoting different components of UA to different stakeholders and regions. End-users can actively communicate with internet companies and internet providers and demonstrate that there is a demand for UA.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Ajay Data, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: 
Akinori Maemura, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group

Speaker 3: Kulesza Joanna, Civil Society, Eastern European Group
Speaker 4: 
Walter Wu, Private Sector, Asia-Pacific Group

Moderator: Maria Kolesnikova, Technical Community, Eastern European Group

Online Moderator: Dennis Tan, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not addressed during this workshop.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #271 Multilingualism online: old challenges and new perspectives

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:27
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is the role of the different stakeholder groups, like the technical community, the users, the governments, the business, for achieving multilingualism online?, What are the initiatives that can be taken to favour interoperability of different languages, in particular the less used ones? , Is the production and fruition of local content in the Internet affected by the lack of support by Internet infrastructure and content providers, as well as social media, of local languages and local writing systems?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

We have addressed the issues of multilingualism in the Internet from different points of view. Points of agreement include:

  • translation is sometimes insufficient, in particular when dealing with interaction between "minor" languages;
  • social media are targeting the broader population and therefore might even amplify the problem for minorities, but the rise of local social media could better address the development and promotion of local languages and scripts;
  • favouring multilingualism on the Internet requires broad actions from different stakeholders;
  • there is still a lack of understanding about the differences between languages and writing systems;
  • multilingualism on the Internet cannot be achieved only with the implementation of technical solutions - although technical solutions are a prerequisite;
  • developing multilingual capabilities on the Internet is a huge task and requires co-ordinated efforts by multiple stakeholders.

There have been no real disagreements, but from the debate it was clear that different speakers were attaching a different priority to different aspects.

The audience has been polled about their mother tongue and related script - or writing system - and how this relates to their Internet presence. Most people are comfortable with the current situation, but the overarching question is if the IGF participants are a representative sample of the global population.

3. Key Takeaways

This issue affects primarily users, who will have limitations to their user experience and ultimately their ability to produce and access local content on the Internet - they should take the lead and put pressure on the other stakeholder groups to provide the necessary solutions and collaborate in raising awareness.

The replies to the poll show that there is confusion among the participants even about languages and scripts. This suggests that much has to be done still about raising awareness of the different aspects of multilingualism and about education of the different stakeholders.

This is a complex problem and the solution depends on multiple actions by multiple stakeholder groups, including for instance governments to promote multilingualism, social media and other platforms to support local languages and scripts, civil society to raise awareness and promote local contents.

The Governments have a special role, because they can create digital policies and also promote partnerships with the private sector to address these issues.

Actors acting globally - like International Organizations - can play a key role, also providing guidelines for local Governments.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

John Klensin has provided an overview of the most important issues that are barriers to entry for new people or greater use - local languages, difficulties of translation, writing systems including insufficient rendering of text, difference in culture, etc.

Abdalmonem Tharwat Galila has spoken about Universal Acceptance of Internationalized Domain Names and Internationalized Email Addresses.

Maria Kolesnikova has spoken about the user experience in different contexts, in particular in relation to her experience with the ccTLDs .ru and .рф, but also in relation to social media.

Roberto Gaetano has spoken about some initiatives to promote local languages on the Internet in Latin America and Italy.

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

In the discussion about the barriers to Internet access at large mention was made to social and cultural barriers which includes denial of access to women and girl child access to technology. However, this topic has not been thoroghly discussed and the team believes that it should be part of a follow-up work - maybe for the next IGF - that could also address the different use of language that women make in certain cultures, for instance when related to the social role that they have in a stratified society.

8. Session Outputs:

Internet still being far from being a truly Inclusive platform universally and the paucity of Multiligualism is one of the many barriers to Access to Internet for hundreds of millions of people - see also the BBC article The many languages missing from the internet https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200414-the-many-lanuages-still-missing-from-the-internet.

Time may have come for not just adding scripts to the Unicode one after the other, but to consider the importance and relevance of a particular language/writing system in the global/regional scheme of things, so that further development of the language/writing system such as content building and usage can progress in a more meaningful way.

Multilingualism has an impact on SDG 4 - Inclusive and Equitable Quality Education - because the digital divide, especially amongst the poor, also has to do with not having access or sufficient access to educational material in mother toungue languages/writing systems.

Multilingualism has an impact on SDG 5 - Gender Equality - Besides the points made above under "Reflection to Gender Issues", increasing ability to communicate, create and get information in local language and script helps fighting imbalances in the society, including Gender Inequality.

Multilingualism has an impact on SDG 9 - Infrastructure - because the language is an impediment to some network expansion. See also the final report on IGF 2020 provided by Diplo Foundation: https://dig.watch/events/igf2020/final-report - Section Development, Internet Access.

The result of the poll conducted during the session are herehttps://www.mentimeter.com/s/9d61b54e9269f3140927468b44474ebf/d9e1a5852…

 

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #271 Multilingualism online: old challenges and new perspectives
10. Voluntary Commitment

To bring together the voices of the minorities whose languages are at risk of being forgotten or that cannot appropriately produce fruition of local content on the Internet not only to the global IGF, but also for the regional and national IGFs.

To work actively in the IGF as well as in the IETF pushing multilingualism issues.

To work with or without internationalization and keeping IDN working and making them better if there are technical issues.

To focus more on contents than on the technical issues.

 

IGF 2020 WS #273 Enhancing sustainable computing, production & consumption

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:46
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1) How do we advance sustainable and efficient computing, production, and consumption in the milieu of the 4th Industrial Revolution?, 2) How can we guarantee good use of the Internet without harming the environment?, 3) How can SDG's 9, 12, 11 and 13 be fostered digitally and lower the impact on environment?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Research suggests that current production models are seriously impacting the economy, environment, and the society at large. The digitalisation of the economy is no exception. Ms Ece Vural (International Relations Department Manager, Habitat Association) asked the session panellists five main policy questions which address how newer ways of computing and digital advances can improve the sustainability of current productions models and benefit society. First of all, it is important that we define the concept of sustainable computing and make society understand that there are ways to optimise and reduce the energy consumption of the existing computer infrastructure. Ms Jaewon Son (Committee Member, Korea Internet Governance Alliance) explained that Korea is increasing its investment in the economy, especially towards small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and businesses that provide online services in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Mr Daniel Jr Dasig (Associate Professor, De La Salle University Dasmarinas) explained that the geography of innovation continues to shift, and the sustainability of computing is an issue that affects both developed and developing countries. Mr Mohammad Atif Aleem (Regional Engagement Director for Asia Pacific Group, Youth Special Interest Group, Internet Society) clarified that sustainable consumption is about doing more and better with less. He added that information and communications technology (ICT) penetration is still a challenge in many developing countries. This is especially relevant when addressing the climate change challenge. For example, in the sub-Saharan region, there is still a lack of meteorological stations. Ms Chineyenwa Okoro Onu (Founder and Managing Director, Waste or Create Hub) stressed the importance of putting people first and equipping them with information and knowledge.

3. Key Takeaways

- How can SDGs 9, 12, 11 and 13 be fostered digitally and lower the impact on the environment
- Potential that digital technology offers in the field of production and consumption
- Role of quality education in enhancing sustainable initiatives
- Information on how gender equality can be promoted through digital ways, and in the associated SDGs for equitable distribution and representation
- Information on IsuComputing and digital advances to improve the sustainability 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

1) Ms Ece Vural (Moderator) 
2) Ms Jaewon Son
3) Mr Daniel Jr Dasig 
4) Mr Mohammad Atif Aleem
5) Ms Chineyenwa Okoro Onu

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session briefly discussed on how gender equality can be promoted through digital ways, and in the associated SDGs for equitable distribution and representation. The speakers stressed the importance of mainstreaming gender equality, especially regarding the inclusion of women in digital communication. (Social) media can be a powerful tool if used correctly, as statistics show that 73% of women have been exposed to or experienced violence online. Moreover, it is important that women can participate in digital businesses on an equal footing. In this regard, many corporations are launching gender-based opportunities.

9. Group Photo
WS #273 Enhancing sustainable computing, production & consumption
10. Voluntary Commitment

To advance the work of sustainability across sectors in individual capacity.

IGF 2020 WS #287 Robots against disinformation - Automated trust building?

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:18
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
(i) how the different stakeholders perceive bots and whether they saw them as potentially having a positive influence in the imbalances caused by the phenomenon;, (ii) questioned which were the best approaches to apply these tools and whether it should be different depending on the fact that misinformation originated from a malicious campaign or if it had a less intentional origin;, (iii) explored whether there were any social risks associated with deploying bots to counter misinformation, whether it did not restrict speech - in essence whether people did not have a right to be wrong or say something that might be wrong.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The members of the workshop discussed the soundness of using automated tools and bots for countering disinformation. They highlighted the potential for positive uses in enabling and empowering the work of individuals dealing with disinformation campaigns. It was noted as well their social positive impact in raising awareness and serving as media literacy tools. 

The discussion addressed as well the risks involved in deploying them. It was mentioned that these tools may limit speech and may interfere with other individual rights. 

The debate moved on to whether there should be different technical approaches to deal with spread of  misinformation (less intentional) and disinformation (with a malicious intent). The participants seemed to agree that it was less a matter of approach or technical tools and more a matter of tactics. A coordinated campaign to spread disinformation would require a higher degree of coordination from the actors trying to stop its spread or to counter its deleterious effects. 

The discussion evolved to deal with the legitimacy of deployment of such tools and participants suggested that transparency and a human-centered approach were at the heart of the matter. To finish there was a discussion whether using these tools may not run counter to other rights such as a “right to be wrong” and share views that may be considered wrong.

3. Key Takeaways

The key takeaways from the workshop related to the soundness of deploying bots to counter desinformation, the instances where these tools can be deployed, the policies to mitigate risk and under which basis and criteria to address their efficacy and legitimacy. 

The first takeaway is that bots and automated tools can play a role in fighting disinformation. They can be important innovative and compelling ways to address this multifaceted phenomenon. Their use to identify and monitor instances of disinformation tends to be the most  effective way to apply them and the less prone to risk. They present an important opportunity to concentrate resources on instances where human oversight is more crucial. When used directly to moderate speech they may involve a higher risk of limiting rights such as freedom of expression access to information. 

The deployment of any such tool should  be accompanied by efforts of transparency. Explanation of the inner workings of the tools, the criteria they follow and their effects are of significant importance.

The legitimate use of bots may depend not only on how it is used and its objective but also on the actors that are deploying them. The public administration should be held to a higher standard, deploying them only on instances where it can be justified. Social media platforms should also be held to account when implementing such tools and processes. The imbalance of power is a significant factor and raises the social risks associated with their application

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Christopher Tuckwood, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Debora Albu, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 3: Jenna Fung, Civil Society, Asia and Asia Pacific Group, Affiliation: Net Missions
Speaker 4: Jan Gerlach, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Moderator: Christian Perrone, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were only marginally addressed through the consideration that disinformation and hate speech affect particularly women and gender-diverse groups. Such minorities suffer from coordinated inauthentic behaviour campaigns, especially during election periods regardless of the region / country addressed. 
Besides this, there are numerous examples on how the use of artificial intelligence tools and processes discriminates on the basis of gender and race, which can pose a challenge and a threat to the deployment of such initiatives when countering disinformation.

8. Session Outputs:

There is an agreement between the group of speakers that the use of automation, bots and artificial intelligence tools to counter disinformation has to be human-centered and supervised. Also, it should be noted that this usage concentrates on the phases of identification and filtration and not on the phase of responding to disinformation - or misinformation - campaigns.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #289 Women and the platform economy: Access, Autonomy and Agency

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
The gender digital continues to prevail across most countries in the global South. While the cost of devices and data packs is one factor, social and cultural norms also contribute to the gap in internet use. As work is increasingly mediated by digital technologies, women are bound to lose out on economic opportunities. With increasing digital interventions in work, the skills needed to work and navigate the workplace are fast changing. How can we ensure that these developments are not exclusionary?, Worker autonomy on digital platforms - both on-demand services and online work - is severely hindered because of the use of algorithmic monitoring systems. Platforms may use the language of micro-entrepreneurship and flexibility but these novel forms of monitoring control every aspect of work on the platforms - from setting wages to dictating hours and locations (for on-demand services) of work. Misclassifying workers as contractors while still exerting strong control over the terms of engagement has been a long standing issue which needs to be urgently addressed with regulations that strengthen worker protections. The ongoing pandemic has laid bare the vulnerabilities facing workers. How can we imagine social protection in the age of digital platform work? What kind of regulatory frameworks can we design to make platforms more accountable towards workers?, Worker autonomy on digital platforms - both on-demand services and online work - is severely hindered because of the use of algorithmic monitoring systems. Platforms may use the language of micro-entrepreneurship and flexibility but these novel forms of monitoring control every aspect of work on the platforms - from setting wages to dictating hours and locations (for on-demand services) of work. Misclassifying workers as contractors while still exerting strong control over the terms of engagement has been a long standing issue which needs to be urgently addressed with regulations that strengthen worker protections. The ongoing pandemic has laid bare the vulnerabilities facing workers. How can we imagine social protection in the age of digital platform work? What kind of regulatory frameworks can we design to make platforms more accountable towards workers?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The session covered issues around the access, agency, and autonomy of women workers in the platform economy. Around access, we discussed occupational segregation, with women concentrated in ‘feminine’ jobs and having reduced access to jobs that do not traditionally have women workers. We also discussed the impact of gender norms on access, which have no easy solutions.

In the discussion on agency, Sofia Scasserra discussed the challenges faced by women workers in representing themselves through traditional unions in Latin America, as more ‘feminised’ sectors get left behind. However, more and more women are joining trade unions, and have devised concrete strategies such as logging out, filing petitions around workers’ safety in court, and pushing for media attention to gain traction to workers’ issues. These strategies have led to some positive developments in Latin America, which can show the roadmap to other economies – in Argentina, there is a draft law formulated in consultation with trade unions which will pro-rate all benefits such as leaves, social security contributions from employers etc. This allows workers to gain benefits while retaining the flexibility of gig work. There is also a provision for algorithmic audits to determine gender biases, which protects women workers from automated discrimination.

In the section on autonomy, Fairuz Mullagee discussed the shift to non-standard forms of work through digital technology. The flexibility of the platform economy is also leading to fragmentation of work, and while people may be earning more than minimum wage, they are excluded from legal protections. She suggested digital tools as a pathway for transformation and improving collective bargaining. There also has to be increased accountability for platforms, including taking the responsibility for the replication of inequality through algorithms. Principles of fair work and counteracting monopolistic behaviour are some of the ways forward to achieve this.

3. Key Takeaways

During the breakout sessions, each for access, agency, and autonomy, participants shared their insights on key issues. 

Laws that protect basic labour standards and access to social protection need to be extended to platform workers. However, the law is not the only way to increase platform accountability - this can also be done through algorithm checks which will solve many issues on platforms. 

There was agreement on the fact that regulatory frameworks need to be implemented properly. Without proper implementation processes or enforcement, regulation and legal frameworks may not make a difference to empowering workers or improving conditions of work. 

Principles for fair work based on fair pay, fair contracts, fair wages, ability to collectivise, and access to grievance redressal are a good starting point to start thinking about decent work on platforms. These principles need to be talked about in greater detail among like minded groups. 

Access does not always translate to meaningful participation therefore different models of organization like self help groups should be explored. 

Digital literacy and skilling remain questions that need further exploration because existing programmes and initiatives don’t seem to factor that specific challenges that women face. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session focussed on women in the platform economy. Women tend to be overrepresented on feminised platforms like care work that tend to be less visible to both policy makers and trade unions, making them vulnerable to be left behind from unionising activities. The digital gender divide is a pressing issue and there is a risk that as work gets digitised women will continue to lose out on opportunities. We spoke about women’s access to job opportunities, inequities in working terms and wages, and the difficulty of unionising women working on platforms.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #290 Unlocking the Internet: Stakeholder Perspectives of Interoperability

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How could increased interoperability be a future-proof way to solve some of the most intractable issues of the Internet platform market?, Standardisation: how could mandated interoperability standards lead to a more inclusive internet? And how do we ensure that the development of those standards is inclusive as well?, If everybody can benefit from the obligation to interoperate, how do we ensure privacy and security standards in this new market?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad agreement:
The main area of agreement was that interoperability is a proven way to increase competition and lower barriers to entry in the platforms market. Not just the panelists agreed with this, but as indicated by Dr. Ian Brown’s opening statement, many judicial and civic institutions such as European Commission, US Congress members, the UK Competition and Markets Authority, as well as several lawyer and economist association, are looking into interoperability to solve issues identified with the so called gatekeeping platforms, in areas such as social media, instant messaging, search engines and beyond.

Civil society groups have also included interoperability in their policy documents for platform regulation, as it holds the potential to increase the control of citizens over the media they consume and give them real choice when it comes to for example providers with higher privacy.

Areas needing further discussion and development:
There is still a conversation needed around the pacing of the interoperability mandates, and for which solutions it is the most useful. In addition, it will be important to always discuss the topic in the context of consumer/user privacy. It was agreed that in a European context, the GDPR lays a good foundation, but if not enforced properly, interoperability will not solve the underlying privacy issues. We also didn't have enough time to dig deep into the core internet governance issues that need to be solved, if the standards on which interoperability will be based, will be successful.

3. Key Takeaways

Interoperability is at heart of the Internet. On the layer(s) above the internet, however, interoperability has been limited by applications that use network effects to protect their dominant position. Increasing the interoperability of these layers above the already interoperabile layer, holds the potential to spur more competition, which in turn could lead to more start-ups and SMEs to enter the market in order to deliver solutions that are more user-centric.

One of the stand-out agreements between two stakeholders was the one between the SME-representative and the consumer representative. They both argued the potential of increased interoperability for their respective stakeholder groups.

In terms of ways forward, policy, legal and technical discussions need to be continued. It was agreed that around the presentation of the coming platform regulations from the European Commission this is especially true. Making sure that interoperability mandates will open up competition in the internet platform market, as it has done in earlier networked markets, these issues will have to be addressed by several stakeholders, with a broad societal perspective.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speakers
Vittorio Bertola, Open-Xchange
Michał Woźniak, Technical Community, Eastern European Group
Ian Brown, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Annika Linck, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Maryant Fernandez Perez, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not discussed by any speaker. The stakeholder perspective that we designed the session around did not include gender.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #299 Building Digital Security for Journalists

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:00
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What can be done in terms of regional and international regulation to prevent human rights abuses against journalists in the context of digital security? , Which tools and technologies exist to protect journalists from digital threats and how can these be secured through regulation? Our current export control regimes of surveillance technology fit for purpose?, How can we prevent the fragmentation of the open internet into separate “splinternets”?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Agreement on the main needs today, order to provide journalists with digital safety:  One is technology, which provides secure information and data, for example with end-to-end encryption. The second element is digital security training. There are a lot of journalists, who are aware of threats. Third, a strong framework to protect privacy, lastly regulation, and laws prepared with the consultation with the civil society.

3. Key Takeaways

Internet is a very important part of today's and future's democracy. We have to shape it in order to not put democracy in danger. Politicians should be talking more about their existing legislation, e.g. about the legislation in European countries, which can also be exploited by regimes. What journalists are experiencing in Hong Kong, but also in Belarus and Turkey and Russia, in Brazil can be a lesson and connecting to other politicians worldwide and exchanging views in this regard. Politicians should focus on inclusive and transparent policymaking, including other stake-holders. The policy-making processes should also be discussed in an international atmosphere, in order to create international standards, to share best practices and the knowledge that has been gained in other countries. Forums such as IGF are good opportunities to start a conversation about the challenges.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Helena Bertho Dias, Civil Society, Latin America and Caribbean Group 
Speaker 2: Chi Hang Chan, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 3: Lisa Dittmer, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Jensen Gyde, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 5: Andy Yen, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not discussed. 

8. Session Outputs:

Youtube link can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjQEyYA3OpI&t=4933s

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #299 Building Digital Security for Journalists
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #304 Reaffirming human rights in company responses to crisis

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:22
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How do companies fulfill or fall short of their responsibility to protect and respect human rights in times of crisis, and what best practice should they follow?, What existing or potential mechanisms can the multi-stakeholder human rights community apply to improve companies' transparency and accountability during such crises?, What policies and practices in the areas of governance, respect for freedom of expression, and privacy are critical for companies to safeguard human rights in crisis situations, and how to prevent the crystallization of bad precedents?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Areas of broad agreement included:

  1. There is broad consensus on the importance of maintaining strong human rights due diligence practices in the midst of crises and in the build-up to crises. Participants also expressed robust support for mandatory due diligence requirements on a regional level, following regulation emerging from the European Union. Such efforts provide more tools and leverage to human rights defenders and affected rightsholders.
  2. When receiving excessive demands for user information or content removal, companies must not only exercise due diligence, but commit to pushing back to the maximum extent possible, guided by the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality.
  3. Crises enable contagion effects: practices normalized during crisis risk spilling over into non-crisis contexts. For instance, data collection goes beyond the data minimization principle can form a precedent for similar practices once the emergency is over, and network shutdowns ostensibly carried out with the intention of countering violent protest can spill over into other situations.
  4. Crisis protocols should encompass a range of scenarios at all geographical levels.

Areas that require more discussion included:

  1. Questions remain about the best way to implement, prioritize, and report on human rights due diligence efforts in an environment disrupted by conflict and volatility, especially when the capacity to conduct due diligence is limited and there are numerous salient risks to rightsholders. 
  2. The role of transparency reporting and access to remedy are two perennial issues. How should such reporting be conducted in light of global and local crisis? How can companies strengthen their structures to better provide remedy?
  3. While most participants agreed that it is important to set limits on privacy-related practices such as data collection, inference, and retention, many broader questions remain about topics such as algorithmic transparency and how to ensure it (e.g., through disclosing source codes, standalone policies, audits).
3. Key Takeaways

In the context of COVID-19, it is critical for companies to outline plans for how to limit their collection, inference, and retention of data outside of their usual practices to the crisis context, and precisely define the actions they will take once the crisis is over. As a general rule, companies should also commit to push back against excessive government requests - not just in isolated cases, but as a matter of policy. This should feed into their transparency reporting practices, which should observe the principle of reporting on such requests unless legally barred from doing so, and refrain from presenting data in ways that obfuscate their meaning.

Decision-makers at all levels must also understand that crisis breeds contagion. Both within and across countries, the global spread of network shutdowns was driven by governments learning from each other, adapting extreme restrictions to a plethora of circumstances in which these restrictions were a disproportionate measure. Similarly, the abrogation of the right to privacy in the context of a pandemic will likely encourage abuses in other contexts. Governments should refrain from redeploying tools that give them access to vast troves of user data in other situations. At the same time, companies should avoid becoming enablers of human rights violations and refuse to buckle when facing threats of blocking their services if they do not comply with excessive demands.

Social media companies should be particularly vigilant and introspective given that human rights harms they may cause or contribute to can be insidious and difficult to trace. For instance, their human rights impact assessment processes should explicitly encompass the interaction of their algorithms (including, but not limited to, ranking and recommendation algorithms) with the environment in which they are deployed rather than focus exclusively on the risks of the environment itself

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Dorota Głowacka (Panoptykon Foundation), Civil Society, Eastern European Group
Speaker 2: Isabel Ebert (OHCHR B-Tech Project), Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
Speaker 3: 'Gbenga Sesan (Paradigm Initiative), Civil Society, African Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Although the session did not directly discuss gender issues, women are disproportionately affected by many of the crises discussed. Instability in the midst of political turmoil and network disruptions erect additional barriers to access to online education and other services that have proven vital during the pandemic. Disruptions associated with these periods of crisis have a disproportionate effect on women and slow down efforts to reduce gender gaps, driving communities that are often already vulnerable into even further vulnerability. This underscores the importance of companies pushing back against deliberate disruptions to access in times of overlapping emergencies.

8. Session Outputs:

While it remains to be seen whether the organizers and speakers will produce joint outputs from the session, all of them will continue to publish relevant research and advocacy work. Ranking Digital Rights plans to discuss the relationship between company policies and crises in the 2020 RDR Index, to be published in February 2021. RDR’s 2019-20  methodology development process and the final methodology for the 2020 RDR Index can be found here: https://rankingdigitalrights.org/methodology-development/2020-revisions/. The Paradigm Initiative’s 2020 Digital Rights in Africa report will be released in April 2021. The Panoptykon Foundation and B-Tech Project will continue to release publications that engage with the topics discussed, ranging from privacy to access to remedy. Recent and forthcoming publications can be found on their respective websites

9. Group Photo
WS #304 session screenshot (non-organizers and non-speakers blurred)
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #310 How digital payments support inclusive economic growth?

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:09
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the determinants of inclusive economic growth and economic recovery and what role play digital payments and digitisation in supporting inclusive economic growth? , How digital payments may help eradicate the informal economy?, What can be done by different players on the market (private sector and governments) to ensure everyone reaps the benefits of digitisation and inclusive economic growth?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

It is widely accepted that digital payment innovations can be a catalyst for the digital economy. Digital payment solutions help unlock economic growth, boost tax revenues, and reduce the size of the informal economy. Under conditions digital payments are a critical source of empowerment for micro and small enterprises, women entrepreneurs, and underserved populations. Digital payment solutions can also help improve public services, which answer citizen needs. Example of Cashless Poland Program introduced in Poland demonstrates that public-private collaboration, development of market-wide standards and investments in the payment infrastructure contribute to digital maturity and financial inclusion, by almost doubling the number of payment terminals used by merchants. It is desired that other countries develop market-wide standards, prepared by private companies, governments and non-governmental organisations, that will boost the development of digital infrastructure and inclusive economic growth. Cashless Poland Program is an universal concept that may be duplicated in the developing economies.

3. Key Takeaways

The participants of the discussion agreed that digital payments may be an efficient solution to support the development of inclusive economic growth and eradicating the informal economy. Economic theories say that the lower the transaction costs, the more economic activity is conducted, which boosts economic growth.  The studies show, that 20% increase in digital payments per year for 5 consecutive years can reduce the GDP impact of the informal economy by up to 21.8%. Impact of digitisation on economic growth is the biggest for the emerging markets. According to a comprehensive research of Moody’s Analytics, conducted across 70 reviewed countries representing 95% of global GDP, every 1% increase in the usage of digital payments could result in an average annual consumption increase of $104 billion. This applies to both developed and emerging markets, with emerging markets seeing the biggest GDP gains. Importantly, the data demonstrate that with the proper financial infrastructure in place, developing markets could see boosts to GDP as card penetration increases. Shift from cash to credit, debit, and prepaid payments added US $296 billion to global GDP, raised annual household consumption of goods and services, and added the equivalent of 2.6 million new jobs on average annually.  Digital payments can help SMEs grow their revenue, manage their business, and gain access to other financial services. The impact can be substantial – research has found that once businesses begin accepting digital payments, their revenues increase an average of 17%. Digital payments also facilitate the adoption of other digital solutions among the citizens. Hence, faster, easier, cheaper and more secure payments can thus contribute to lower transaction costs and boosting the economic growth.   Supporting SMEs in building their presence on the Internet, encouraging them to accept digital payments and introducing market-wide initiatives is desirable in the developing countries.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Konrad Ślusarczyk, Visa (https://www.intgovforum.org/users/slusarck20094)

Speaker 2: Willem Pieter de Groen, Centre for European Policy Studies (https://www.intgovforum.org/users/willempieterdegroen19982)

Speaker 3: Paweł Widawski, Cashless Poland Foundation (https://www.intgovforum.org/users/pwidawski20362)

Speaker 4: Killion Munyama, Member of Polish Parliament (https://www.intgovforum.org/users/kmunyama27457)

Moderator: Nell Przybylska, Digital Poland Foundation (https://www.intgovforum.org/users/nellprzybylska22505).

Online moderator: Katarzyna Cyrbus, Grayling Poland (https://www.intgovforum.org/users/katarzynacyrbus18874

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:

Panellists together with panel discussion participants agreed that the example of Cashless Poland Program could potentially be a good role model for developing countries, which can benefit the most from digital payments. 

The Cashless Poland Program (https://polskabezgotowkowa.pl/en) established in 2017 by the Cashless Poland Foundation is based on an agreement between public administration (Polish Ministry of Finance) and private companies - payment organizations and banks and as such is a unique example of cooperation between a very wide group of entities, otherwise competing with each other on a daily basis. The beneficiaries of the Program include micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises and public administration units - over 225,000 entities in total.Entrepreneurs participating in the program benefit from a free installation of a payment terminal and a year of free acceptance of cashless payments. In Poland more than 300,000 terminals have been installed thanks to the Foundation's activities. This means that every second entrepreneur accepting cashless payments in Poland received a payment terminal thanks to the Program. The number of payment terminals in Poland is growing rapidly – the number of terminals in Poland has exceeded in 2020 one million. This dynamic growth is a reflection of how the payment infrastructure and digital capabilities allow businesses to grow.

The Foundation's activities have eliminated the initial costs, the main barrier preventing entrepreneurs from having a terminal - a common belief in the high cost of such a service. The program has eliminated this barrier by removing the costs of installation and lease for the first 12 months and the transaction execution costs. Entrepreneurs can therefore assess by themselves whether having a payment terminal brings benefits to them. Currently, the Foundation focuses on eliminating white spots in cashless payments on the map of Poland.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #317 DNS-Abuse in the Age of COVID-19: Lessons Learned

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:18
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is DNS Abuse?, How to mitigate DNS Abuse
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • There was a spike in registration, but most were speculative and/ or were for nonfraudulent purposes
  • It is important to know which is more important: how many abuse domains are registering or how long the domains are live?
  • To tack DNS-Abuse, there is a need to adopt standard definitions of abuse, determine and assigned the appropriate primary poinf for responsibility for abuse resolution and identify and deploy best practices for evidentiary standards.
  • Utilize standardized escalation paths and reasonable timeframes for action on abuse report
  • Borrowing from the military, the noise can be filtered from the signal through experts and machine-learning from expert efforts.
  • The Framework on DNS Abuse standardizes definitions and sets expectations for actions. 
  • Industry can and does act when presented with actionable data and intelligence
  • We need to improve understanding of the roles and capabilities of the various actors involved in combatting DNS abuse
  • The limited roles of registrars, registries and ICANN must be recognized
  • There was good collaboration between the stakeholders during the health crisis.
  • The Domain Security Facilitation Initiative is a technical study group initiated by ICANN’s CEO prior to COVID19.
  • The technical study group examines what can and should ICANN be doing to improve DNS security profile
  • The study group aims to create recommendations that promote best practices, facilitate communications and strengthen collaboration to help all stakeholders mitigate and/ or respond to threats to the DNS ecosystem.
  • Its focus is on the mechanisms by which attacks are carried out rather than the content
  • Providing cross-functional expertise, it aims to provide recommendations on a number of issues, such as large scale DNS operations, handling emergecy response coordination and DNS operational security.
3. Key Takeaways

DNS-Abuse has been a subject gaining increasing attention among its stakeholders. The COVID19 pandemic has brought DNS-Abuse to light, especially DNS-abuse related to the heath crisis. A spike in registration was not unique to COVID1, a similar pattern can be detected following natural disasters, political hot topics, media frenzy topics or events such as those in Christchurch. Most of the registrations turned out to be speculative or non-fraudulent and were addressed in a timely manner within twelve to 24 hours.

The adoption of the Framework on DNS Abuse helps standardize definitions and sets expectations for actions and has now over 50 signatories. Other initiatives, such as the SSAC Report on Practical Next Steps for Tackling Abuse in the DNS and the Domain Security Faciliatation Initiative Technical Study Group also aim to address DNS-Abuse and provide recommendations

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Jeff Bedser,  Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Ashley Heineman, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: John Crain, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Merike Kaeo, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

ModeratorAdiel Akplogan, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender-related issues were not addressed during this session.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #323 Emerging perspectives on the Internet Exchange Points

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:48
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is the role of the IXPs in facilitating Internet connectivity?, What are the essential aspects local legislations include when they regulate IXPs?, What are the policies of democratic and non-democratic regimes regarding IXPs when considering forms of extreme government control?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Speakers agree on the following:

The importance of increasing IXPs, especially in the developing world, as the main drivers for connectivity and Internet service access. Agreement: there are more difficulties to build new IXPs in terms of equipment supply, especially in Africa. In other regions of the developing world, like Latin America, challenges come from the regulatory environment.

All competitors within the telecom market must agree to build and maintain IXPs that serve them and the population. Agreement: IXPs create resilience and are vital for connectivity, especially in crisis times like the current Covid-19 crisis.

Neutral data centers are required and that negotiation contracts should not impose extra costs for the developing world, where there are no enough IXPs or no IXPs at all

-More discussion is needed: consequences of damaging, not protecting/maintaining, and bad regulations over the IXPs. Specifically, what role they play when governments or other actors decide to act over the Internet infrastructure.

3. Key Takeaways

Speakers agree that the creation of IXPs leads to more connectivity, resilience, economic independence, and political autonomy. Yet, these goals don't happen automatically. IXPs can contribute to reaching these goals as long as they are built on agreements that include support, trust, knowledge, and sustainability.

Although IXPs are for the most part privately owned, big telecom corporations are not supposed to take advantage of their position in the market and avoid smaller companies or research centers to participate

During the COVID19 crisis, IXPs proved to be vital elements for the resilience of the Internet. Nevertheless, they lack legal protections from an international standpoint of view.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Patricia Vargas, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

Speaker 2: Jane Coffin, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 3: Che-Hoo Cheng, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group

Speaker 4: Moctar Yedaly, Intergovernmental Organization, African Group

Speaker 5: Ms. Nurani Nimpuno, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

As Dr. Vargas observed, countries with fewer IXPs have a less resilient technical backbone, which is problematic both in normal times and times of crisis. The problems this creates are especially salient when the population is unevenly distributed across the country.

Low-resilience networks exacerbate the digital gender divide, which manifests itself differently across the world. Low-resilience infrastructures bring instability in the midst of political turmoil and network disruptions, especially when countries flip the Internet kill-switch; they also erect barriers to access to online education and other services that have proven vital during the pandemic.

8. Session Outputs:

One of the most reliable sources in reporting the current number and status of the IXPs at a global level is Packet Clearing House: PCH - https://www.pch.net/.

The two companies worldwide builders of IXPs are the Duetscher Commercial Internet Exchange and the LINX, the London Internet Exchange.

The Internet Society is one of the most relevant sources for constant training and discussion to build and maintain IXPs.

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #323 Emerging perspectives on the Internet Exchange Points
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #325 Internet of Things: Trust, Trick or Threats?

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:03
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What type of policies can be applied to make effective the efforts employed by the stakeholders?, What are common behaviors in relation to the installation, configuration and operation of IoT devices, and how gaps in those setups weaken the security of the end user?, We expect to review different solutions from an Internet Governance perspective, including the approach taken by institutions including the IETF, broader academia, local governments, and the industry. In addition, the session aims to suggest guidelines for policies to reduce the impact of insecurity on the ecosystem of the Internet originating from domestic IoT devices based on multistakeholder findings and subsequent discussion with the audience.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The security and privacy issues of IoT home devices have been discussed with the practical use cases of IoT within the home context as a starting point. Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados (LGPD), the Brazilian data protection law has been introduced and the origin of the problem and design flaws within the IoT devices which might cause security issues have been identified while touching upon privacy, and cloud interaction. The panels evaluated the sustainability of the current model and discussed the possibilities of distributed intelligence as an alternative to keep it synchronized and interoperable. The solutions to address the challenges have been reviewed including the best practices in IoT deployment with maintenance themes being emphasized. One of the challenges that has been pointed out is that the IoT technologies and security related guidelines are mainly addressed by the major firms but not government or consumers. With the multistakeholder perspective, the panel touched on the ways for diverse stakeholders to have a collective action on the issue.

3. Key Takeaways

Ensuring the security and privacy is essential for the IoT ecosystem to thrive while the guidelines and related decision-making process have to involve diverse stakeholders including civil society and policy makers.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Mark Datysgeld, Governance Primer

Online ModeratorLUIS GUSTAVO DE SOUZA AZEVEDO, Universidade Federal do Acre

RapporteurJaewon Son, Korea Internet Governance Alliance

Speakers:

  1. Martha Teye, Zlitch Technologies
  2. Edgar Ramos, Ericson
  3. Sávyo Vinícius de Morais, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

This subject affects people of all genders and identity, and should be considered a common good.

8. Session Outputs:

The main output provided by this session was the spread of information about the current and future security and privacy issues regarding IoT. The speakers also highligted the following recommendations for the community:

  • The is need for a descentralization of the IoT applications, allowing more control of the end-users over their data and more reliability for the systems;
  • The end-users still need more awareness about good security practices on deploying their applications and devices to provide a securier Internet ecosystem;
  • Manufacturers must to pay more attention for the development of their devices, following the security best practices for software development, and implementing the open and available security standards;
  • Support the implementation of appropriate criptography and authentication methods.
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #325 Internet of Things: Trust, Trick or Threats
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #326 The promises and perils of satellite internet

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What lessons have we learned from previous efforts to 'connect the world' and rapidly bring more people online? Can we theorize new ways of working amongst stakeholders, including governments and ISPs, that avoid the many pitfalls of the legacy telecom sector here on earth, including monopolistic practices, pervasive surveillance, and network disruption and discrimination? Will the satellite sector openly work with our communities to implement such new models of cooperation? Will the services be amenable to uses like censorship circumvention that may run afoul of government partners and financiers?, The impact of digital sovereignty and Internet fragmentation threaten the satellite internet sector even in its infancy. Private sector control, and companies largely from China, Western Europe, and the USA are forerunners in controlling satellite internet services. How will governments be able to regulate firms satellite internet firms that largely operate out of a few select countries? Won't this recreate many of the problems with social media platforms, which hold outsize influence over the data of people all over the world, but only answer to relatively few regulators and governments?, The security, stability and resilience of the Internet infrastructure, systems and devices are already at risk. Will satellite internet provide yet another platform for location and data surveillance? Will satellite internet be adequately secured against intrusion, and robust enough to ensure stable bandwidth across geographies? How will the average user benefit? What due diligence will the sector do to ensure human rights and security and respected and protected, even in the face of government pressure?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Sovereignty and the splintering internet: it was agreed that satellite internet services are not immune from the factors leading to distrust between major internet governance actors and the bifurcation of the internet between the US/Western Europe and China. 

Increasing dependence on internet services: COVID-19 led us to increasingly rely on the Internet for work, education, and many other aspects of our lives. However, there are 3.8 billion people worldwide who are yet to get online. Many others are struggling to stay connected due to expensive data plans, literacy and electrification challenges, as well as intentional disruptions like internet shutdowns. We will not reach Sustainable Development Goal target 9(c) by 2020, and need innovative new ways to bridge digital divides, while also respecting human rights. 

Basic economic barriers remain. Low earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations failed in the 1990s and are still "not a slam dunk," even for billionaires like Elon Musk, who has stated his goal is "not to go bankrupt." Fixed costs are high for internet constellations. But we are fairly certain there will be variable prices, meaning different users in different countries may pay different rates to access services from the same constellation of satellites. In essence, the more affluent countries will pay more, which may tend to heal the digital divide.

Global cooperation is key. These satellites are global infrastructure. Now only a few states launch satellites but the number of governments involved will quickly grow. We need global collaboration, laws, standards and regulations.

 

3. Key Takeaways

Space can be a "freedom launcher." Existing applications of satellite connectivity for spreading access to information, including the "Knapsack" service by NetFreedom Pioneers, show the possibility of circumvention obstacles to connecting. Service providers may not want to irk national "gateway" controllers, but people may be able to directly connect in ways that route around censorship.

Surveillance comes naturally to satellite internet services, which know the location and the bandwidth usage of those transmitting from earth and back. Strong encryption, data minimization, and human rights due diligence are needed to prevent greater centralization and abuse of personal data. Without these safeguards, the largely Western and China-based service providers may end up recreating many of the inequities and risks fo social media platforms.

Regulation and global cooperation are possible and necessary. Practically, collisions could be catastrophic, and satellite constellations must coordinate their routes. There are usable corollaries in the Outer Space treaty as well as the law of the seas. As one participant said, "We pulled it off on the high seas, and should be able to pull it off here as well." Conceiving of space as a commons does not comport with the current for-profit approach. Greater UN and multi-stakeholder cooperation will be needed to navigate the many economic, environmental, political, policy, and human rights impacts and interests in play.

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator

--Peter Micek, Access Now, General Counsel and UN Policy Manager; Columbia Univ. School of International and Public Affairs, Adjunct Professor

Presentations by:

--Felicia Anthonio, Access Now, Campaigner and #KeepItOn Lead

--Larry Press, Professor Emeritus of Information Systems at California State University, Dominguez Hills

--Jenny Stein, US State Department, Special Advisor for Internet Freedom and Business and Human Rights in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor

Reply remarks from:

--Felix Blanc, Internet Sans Frontieres, Director of Public Policy and PhD in Political Science

--Ahmad Ahmadian, NetFreedom Pioneers and Knapsack, Business Development Manager

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

In relation to efforts to reach the SDGs, presenters noted the inequitable distribution of internet access, which  disproportionately affects people in already under-served and at-risk communities, such as women and girls. The panel also discussed the particular impacts of internet shutdowns on vulnerable and marginalized communities, including women. Further, two of the panel's three main presenters identify as women.

8. Session Outputs:

The Geneva Internet Platform issued an immediate after-session report: https://dig.watch/resources/igf-2020-ws-326-promises-and-perils-satellite-internet

Access Now invited civil society organizations to join its global campaign against internet shutdowns, #KeepItOn. More information is at: https://www.accessnow.org/keepiton/

Panelist Jenny Stein of the US State Department invited feedback on its new guidance document on human rights due diligence in the tech sector. The "Guidance on Implementing the UN Guiding Principles for Transactions Linked to Foreign Government End-Users for Products or Services with Surveillance Capabilities" is available here: https://www.state.gov/release-of-u-s-department-of-state-guidance-on-implementing-the-un-guiding-principles-for-transactions-linked-to-foreign-government-end-users-for-products-or-services-with-surveillance-capabilities/

Larry Press drew attention to this recent publication: https://www.salon.com/2020/11/14/big-tech-is-leading-the-new-space-race-heres-why-thats-a-problem/

 

9. Group Photo
satellite internet panel at IGF2020 - jenny stein, peter micek, felicia anthonio, larry press, felix blanc, and ahmad ahmadian are pictured
10. Voluntary Commitment

Larry Press offered his volunteer services to all stakeholders. All presenters agreed they look forward to continuing to advance protection for human rights and the environment, in their respective roles and responsibilities, with regard to the emerging satellite internet service sector. Should any regulators or private sector operators wish to consult, these experts offered their counsel.

 

IGF 2020 WS #327 Believe it or not, the Internet Protocol is on Sale!

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:57
Inclusive Internet Governance Ecosystems and Digital Cooperation
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Will the IPv4 market help the adoption of IPv6 on the Internet by providing companies more time to plan their migration? Or will it jeopardize even more the IPv6 adoption by giving a false impression that IPv6 is not needed for the future of the Internet?, Will the IPv4 market improve address distribution among institutions, making it more egalitarian (that is, allowing institutions to trade their surplus IPv4 addresses with institutions that are suffering from a lack of IPv4 addresses)? Or will it worsen the situation by allowing institutions that have greater financial support to concentrate addresses even more?, Will the IPv4 market expand or reduce digital inclusion? Will the price applied per IPv4 address be affordable for Internet Service Providers(ISPs), without increasing the Internet plan price offered to an end user?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

All present panelists agreed that building networks is expensive. For example, according to Mr. Hogewoning, the necessity of developing a network to run both on IPv4 and IPv6 would make the whole process even more costly. However, much of that cost would be due to IPv4 high maintenance. IPv6 actually may lower this cost as the need for IPv4 becomes lower.

On the other hand, there seemed to be no consensus on how the IPv4 market and IPv6 deployment are related. According to Mr. Horward's research, both the rate of IPv4 addresses acquisition (via IPv4 market) and IPv6 addresses adoption seemed to have a linear growth and both had the same growth rate. Although these growths may indicate a perfect correlation between both IPv4 and IPv6, the panelists could not reach a consensus on what makes this correlation happen.

3. Key Takeaways

The main takeaway for this session is that IP addresses are needed in order to guarantee digital inclusion. Every Internet connection needs an IP address in order for it to work properly. 

Currently, we are facing an IPv4 shortage due to technical limitations of the protocol. This led to many possible solutions like developing a new protocol called IPv6 or solutions focusing on better distributing IPv4 via IPv4 market.

Another takeaway all of the panelists that were present agreed on is that IPv6 could solve the main IPv4 exhaustion issue. Moreover, even though the IPv4 market is still a possible solution it should not replace IPv6 deployment.

The final takeaway is that Autonomous Systems and Internet Service Providers networks seems to be the most affected by this issue, as IP addresses are one of the core components of those networks.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Lee Howard, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Antonio Marcos Moreiras, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

Marco Hogewoning, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Rajesh Chharia, Private Sector, Asia-Pacific Group

 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Due to the technical aspect of the discussion (IP addresses), the session did not discuss gender issues.

8. Session Outputs:

There was no consensus on how to tackle the main issue (IPv4 market). Further discussion is needed with more involved organizations, mainly Regional Internet Registries and Autonomous Systems. 

IPv6 solves this issue by completely replacing IPv4, removing the need for IPv4 market. Unfortunately, this solution needs full commitment of Autonomous Systems on deploying IPv6 and the actual panorama indicates that only one third of the Internet is IPv6 ready.

Relevant links:

IPv4 Market and IPv6 Deployment
https://ipv4.global/ipv4-market-and-ipv6-deployment/

The RIPE NCC has run out of IPv4 Addresses
https://www.ripe.net/publications/news/about-ripe-ncc-and-ripe/the-ripe-ncc-has-run-out-of-ipv4-addresses

Number Resources
https://www.iana.org/numbers

Regional Internet Registries
https://www.nro.net/about/rirs/

9. Group Photo
Workshop "Believe it or not, the Internet Protocol is on Sale!"
10. Voluntary Commitment

The established commitment was to continue studies on this subject and to help spread knowledge about IPv6.

IGF 2020 WS #330 The Future of Work from Home: Internet Governance Post Covid

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:54
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How can policymakers ensure that any broad movement toward telework incorporate serious considerations and mitigation efforts relative to the inequalities that this development will likely exacerbate? , What are the discrete ways in which internet governance will need to evolve to keep pace with, push back on, or shape evolving norms in digital workspaces?, What types of technical solutions will need to be adopted in order to facilitate a safe and secure virtual workforce? For example, what role should encryption play as more sensitive materials traverse networks?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • During teleworking, the boundary between the personal and professional is increasingly blurred. Panelists agreed that employers ought to be resonsible for setting new norms at the "virtual" workplace to decrease instances of burnout. Gender norms are also an important part of the discussion as work enters the home -- if women, especially in the global south, are expected to retain traditional roles in the home, employers should take note of this.
  • Panelists agreed that internet connectivity remains a major challenge, especially in the global south, but certainly not limited to the global south. Lack of internet connectivity can prevent some workers from gaining flexible work arrangements that can take them out of harm's way in a pandemic setting.
  • The benefits of a shift to telework are not going to be shared equally. Teleworking arrangements are far more available for knowledge, creative, and otherwise digital workers compared to service sector or manual workers. While there is an element of "digital upskilling" that employers and governments ought to be responsible for in order to bring more workers into the digital economy, it is not realistic to expect this to apply broadly. Governments need to ensure that service sector employees are protected during the pandemic, even if they cannot work from home.
3. Key Takeaways

The panel identified a host of opportunities and challenges that the move to telework brings to society, some of which apply broadly and some of which are regionally specific.

For example, while internet connectivity is an issue that can hinder teleworking across regions, the need for broadband is much more accute in the global south, where internet connectivity rates can lag well under 50 percent.

The benefits of a shift to telework are not going to be shared equally. Teleworking arrangements are far more available for knowledge, creative, and otherwise digital workers compared to service sector or manual workers. While there is an element of "digital upskilling" that employers and governments ought to be responsible for in order to bring more workers into the digital economy, it is not realistic to expect this to apply broadly. Governments need to ensure that service sector employees are protected during the pandemic, even if they cannot work from home.

For those who are eligible and do utilize teleworking agreements, the boundary between the personal and professional is increasingly blurred and the need for auxillary forms of social cohesion are neccessary. Panelists agreed that employers ought to be resonsible for setting new norms at the "virtual" workplace to decrease instances of burnout and to replicate the social aspect of work. Gender norms are also an important part of the discussion as work enters the home -- if women, especially in the global south, are expected to retain traditional roles in the home, employers should take note of this.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Moderator: Brian Scarpelli, ACT | The App Association

Speaker 1:  Karen Kocher, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Helani Galpaya, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 3: Becca Williams, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Carmel Somers, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The panel discussed how gender norms intersect with the blurring boundary between the personal and professional as work shifts to the home environment. Helani raised that women, especially in the global south, are expected to retain traditional roles in the home, while still being expected to produce at the same levels as their male counterparts.  This is a phenomenon that cuts across class and sectors of employment. The productivity expectations of employers must change if the entire workforce (male and female) is home if female workers are saddled with the same traditional responsibilities.

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #330 The Future of Work from Home: Internet Governance Post Covid
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #338 Keeping us together: Internet infrastructure in emergencies

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:41
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How do we keep up with appropriate development of tools, technologies, and infrastructure that allow society to be resilient under severe circumstances?, What are the roles, gaps, bottlenecks, risks and opportunities in leveraging information infrastructures, the Internet and the digital ecosystem as a whole when tackling emergency situations?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The session convened several stakeholders from four different continents of the world. Participants addressed a set of issues pertaining to the global Internet infrastructure, ICTs and the resilience of the global digital ecosystem. The speakers also brought to the session examples and use-cases from their local contexts, reporting on concrete situations of disasters and how their countries and stakeholders leveraged ICTs and the Internet to mitigate negative effects, such as with Japan after the 2011 Tsunami and Puerto Rico after the 2017 Hurricane Maria.

Throughout interventions, participants agreed on the importance of having resilient infrastructure for times of disaster. In these contexts, the Internet and communication services play a vital role in mitigating the effects of crises. With that, the need to make constant investments in resistant infrastructures capable of serving the population in case of disasters was mentioned, as well as the permanent search for innovation. Not only does the Internet suffer in situations like those, but also other fundamental infrastructure, such as electricity, water, roads, bridges and so on.

The various actors addressed a variety of crisis contexts, showing that the faced problems and the possible solutions vary widely according to the region and economical, social and geographical contexts. Therefore, both local and global aspects were addressed and possible measures and strategies were discussed to deal with infrastructure issues in times of crisis. There was broad consensus on the need for concrete nationwide plans for post-disaster recover of countries and regions, as well as the enhanced cooperation between actors in leveraging technologies for this purpose.

Additionally, as it would be expected, the COVID-19 pandemic was also an important topic discussed in the session, with stakeholders reporting on their local realities, gaps, main problems and measures undertaken to mitigate negative effects for the population.

3. Key Takeaways

Some key takeaways when dealing with infrastructure problems in disasters and emergencies in general were:

- The importance of taking into account the different contexts and possibilities of disasters;
- Importance of building infrastructure taking into account the possibility of disasters;
- How different actors must come together in responding to problems arising from times of crisis and disasters;
- Importance of preparing for disasters and having action plans for them;
- Possibility of learning from experiences in other countries;
- The need for quick responses to serve the affected population;
- Specifically in the case of the Internet, the importance of having a decentralized network infrastructure;
- Along with plans, prepare backup tools in different areas, such as communications, power supply chains, health services and so on.
- Need for reflecting upon possible measures to guarantee meaningful and effective Internet access for people

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

- Alison Gillwald, Executive Director of Research ICT Africa, South Africa 
- Americo Muchanga, President of ARECOM, the Mozambican Communications Regulatory Authority 
- Hajime Onga, Telecommunications Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan 
- Pablo Rodriguez, Executive Vice-President at NIC.PR, Puerto Rico 
- Taís Niffinegger, Head of International Affairs at the Brazilian National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) 
- Demi Getschko, CEO of NIC.br, Brazil

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

There was no specific mention to gender issues. There was indeed mention to inequalities in a broader sense, and also how COVID-19 deepened preexisting inequalities.

8. Session Outputs:

No explicit outputs were referred, except for the improving of networks between participants and other interested stakeholders, and possible future collaboration.

9. Group Photo
Workshop 338 photo with all the speakers
10. Voluntary Commitment

There was one specific voluntary commitment that was more or less agreed among speakers that was the need for investments (human and fincancial resources) on resilient infrastructure and nationwide plans to tackle disasters and all kinds of emergency situations.

IGF 2020 WS #340 Checks and balances of data privacy within mass surveillance

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:31
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the demands, conditions, tools, solutions, outcomes and
potential effects posed by the massive pursuit of personal data in order to best utilize data
without harming fundamental rights as the right of privacy, How to leverage multistakeholder dialogues in order to reach possible
solutions and consensus on this issue?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

. Legislation and legislators should consider that its enforcement will necessarily take place through data processing, so it should be responsible for what and how it regulates personal data protection.

. Existing legislation must be adapted to the current context and data demands. In places that do not have specific Internet personal data protection regulations, responsible parties must be careful and transparent with the adopted rules, express their rationale and the methods adopted for data management, in order to protect data and identities while manipulating public health data.

. Stimulate transparency and trust mechanisms on the Internet with a real concern to protect identities (especially minorities) avoiding the enhancement of an environment of mass surveillance and reinforcement of discrimination.

. Advance in data privacy regulation only insofar as there is a deep understanding of what the problem is for which interest group, to avoid solutions that not only do not solve the problem, but also create new ones. 

. To carry out in practice what the data regulation determines, like data collection using proper tools, data processing with properly maintained databases, etc. To avoid collecting unnecessary data, avoiding for instance the use of personal data by intelligence agencies with discriminatory developments, such as the case that occurred this year in the European Union. 

. People-centered approach with democratic safeguards for processing personal data to ensure public trust in the process. 

. Build solutions to the problem of mass surveillance in the context of the pandemic with the participation of the affected population (at some point in the process), on a multistakeholder approach.

. Deepen the understanding about the different dynamics of power and also about the unequal distribution of resources between different interest groups in order to mitigate this issues and properly leverage a multistakeholder dialogue.

3. Key Takeaways

The policy questions previously addressed in this session were complex and related to a major challenge that the world has been facing for almost an year. Despite of this, consensus was reached on how to address such problems.

One of the most important topics would be the takeaways built collectively after the comments and questions posed by the attendees that technology itself is just one of the layers to overcome current data protection in pandemic context challenges. In this sense, to build solutions to address these challenges four different aspects should be taken into account: (i) legal, (ii) economics, (iii) technological, and (iv) cultural.

To this end, the use of technology and law enforcement need to be supported by dialogue with other stakeholders to maintain citizens privacy and be useful for solving problems, considering the correct measurement of data collection for the benefit of the community. 

In this regard, the barriers that hinder the construction of multistakeholder solutions need to be mitigated, such as inclusion problems (Internet access, appropriate devices, financial resources to guarantee the presence in such ocasions), and also the understanding of the different power dynamics of each sector and how they influence the presence and positioning of the others. By minimizing these barriers, the multisectoral approach will move towards building effective solutions for the nowadays challenges.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

- Chenai Chair, Civil Society, Africa Group

- Ellen Strickland, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group

- Nneka Ekechukwu-Soyinka, Private Sector

- Ian Brown, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group

- Carlos Affonso de Souza, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group

- Talar Kalayciyan, Public Sector, Personal Data Commission within the Chief Information office (municipality Amsterdam), Western European and Others Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session did not address the gender issue directly, however it did arise (along other minorities) in the discussion of the effects of mass surveillance in the pandemic context, such as related in the second topic of this report.

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #340 Checks and balances of data privacy within mass surveillance
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #341 Multistakeholder Voices and the UN Cyber Dialogues

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:44
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Is there sufficient multistakeholder participation in the UN cyber dialogues?, How can capacity building support participation of additional states and stakeholders in these dialogues?, How has the COVID pandemic impacted the need for cyber norms and expectations for responsible behavior?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • There was broad agreement that continued progress in both the UN Group of Governmantal Experts (GGE) and Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) will require greater engagement by a wide range of stakeholders, as well as the support of external forums, in order to address the scale of cybersecurity challenges facing the international system.
  • States across the digital divide should take advantage of resources available to build respective capacities to engage in the dialogues on establishing rules for responsible state behavior in cyberspace.
  • The UN Secretary General's Roadmap for Digital Cooperation proposed a potential "Global Statement" on digital trust and security as a political commitment to support the UN's 2030 agenda. While there is some support for the potential of such a statement as a point of high-level alignment across all member states, it remains unclear how it could move forward. 
3. Key Takeaways
  • While the multistakeholder consultation hosted by the OEWG in December 2019 was an important and groundbreaking step forward, more needs to be done to actively include the views and perspectives of the multistakeholder community in the cybersecurity dialogues at the UN.  
  • The multiple engagements by the chair's of the respective working groups at multistakeholder forum's around the world, seeking input and listening to outside perspectives, have been well recieved and helpful in this regard. 
  • The UN dialogues themselves, while open to recieving outside input, have remained outside the public eye for the most part. There is interest in seeing the dialogues made more visibile to a wider audience, given the important of the issues being discussed. 
  • More needs to be done in order to support the resiliency of those nations and communities across the digital divide, as well as their participation in discussions what should and should not be acceptable behaviors in cyberspace. 
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

All intended speakers attended

Speaker 1: Gerardo Isaac Morales Tenorio, Government, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 2: CHRISTOPHER Painter, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: FABRIZIO HOCHSCHILD, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
Speaker 4: Raman Jit Singh Chima, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 5: Kaja Ciglic, Private Sector, Eastern European Group

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The session discussed increasing access to technologies across digital divides in societies, which also include access based on gender. 

8. Session Outputs:

At the conclusion of the session, those in the multistakeholder community seeking to submit contributions to the UN dialogues on responsible behavior in cyberspace were encouraged to send materials directly to UNODA to be hosted on their website, or directly to government participants in the cyber dialogues, many of which are welcoming such contributions. 

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #343 Imagining an internet that serves environmental justice

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:39
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. How are environmental rights intersecting with digital rights?
, 2. How can digital rights defenders and environmental rights defenders work together towards shared priorities?
, 3. How can environmental law and governance inform governance of the internet as a global commons?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
  • Environmental rights and digital rights are human rights. Governance of the internet must be rooted in respect for human rights, including the right to a healthy environment.

  • Practices and governance of indigenous movements can inspire governance of the internet that serves environmental justice, particularly: (1) consent; (2) self determination; (3) informed prior free consultation.

  • Meaningful access to the internet and digital technologies enable environmental rights, including related rights to freedom of expression, assembly, education, and participation in political and public life. Affordability and accessibility continue to be barriers to meaningful access, while communities find alternative solutions for connectivity.

  • The Durban Declaration, one of the most comprehensive multilateral instrument on issues related to racism and racial discrimination, points out the need to promote the use of ICTs, and that all states must recognise the importance of community media.

  • Environmental governance models and processes are valuable resources for governance of the internet as a global commons. Natural and social boundaries can be identified.

  • Principles of environmental law, such as the 'precautionary principle', provide a basis for governance of the internet as a global commons.

  • SDG Goal 7 emphasizes access to affordable and clean energy, and the internet and digital technologies have huge demands for energy. Individuals must be able to choose options that support affordable, clean energy.

  • Multi-stakeholder processes like the IGF are uncommon for environmental governance, and are more likely to be focused narrowly on conservation, which is not aligned with the principles of environmental justice movements.

  • While environmental and social justice movements have grown from the grassroots, digital rights movements are still quite top-down. Digital rights defenders need to work to demonstrate the relevance of internet governance to grassroots movements.

3. Key Takeaways
  • The internet must be governed as a global commons with natural and social boundaries.

  • Practices and governance of indigenous movements can inspire and guide processes for governance of the internet that serves environmental justice particularly: (1) consent; (2) self determination; (3) informed prior free consultation.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Pavel Antonov, BlueLink, – co-moderator

  • Paula Martins, APC - co-moderator

  • Iara Moura, Intervozes - co-organiser and speaker

  • Maryellen Crisóstomo, National Coordination of Articulation of Black Rural Quilombola Communities (CONAQ) - speaker

  • Yunusa Ya’u, CITAD - speaker

  • Alan Finlay, Open Research - speaker

  • Leandro Navarro, Pangea - speaker

  • Sonaksha Iyengar – graphic recorder

  • Jennifer Radloff, APC - rapporteur

  • Veronica Ferrari, APC - rapporteur

  • Shawna Finnegan, APC - rapporteur

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

This session discussed environmental and digital rights, including specific discussion of discrimination and exclusion based on gender, race, and socio-economic context.

8. Session Outputs:

A graphical recording of the session can be found here: https://share2.apc.org/index.php/s/DZswm7QZjQFcdp6

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #346 A Recipe for Deterrence in Cyberspace

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 10:35
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What is the potential for deterrence in cyberspace?, What are existing models/approaches to deterrence in cyberspace?, How might other stakeholder groups be involved in supporting deterrence?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Speakers all recognized a common understanding of “deterrence” that refers to dissuading adversaries and bad actors from taking certain actions. As cyberspace has gained prominence as a domain of conflict in recent years, there is clear need to apply this same thinking to the digital domain in order to discourage attacks and encourage responsible behavior. Different approaches to deterrence that were highlighted included deterrence by punishment, deterrence by denial, and deterrence via benefits for responsible behavior.

Speakers also all recognized that underscoring any effective deterrence model needs to be a clear set of normative expectations, making ongoing international efforts to establish such expectations in cyberspace especially important – including the dialogues at the United Nations, as well as multistakeholder agreements like the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace. The ability to credibly attribute cyberattacks was also cited as a prerequisite for effective deterrence. In addition, especially when it comes to issues of deterrence by denial – or making attacks themselves more difficult to conduct – industry, particularly the technology industry, has an important role to play in ensuring they are developing and maintaining secure products and services to reduce the overall threat surface.

While there was consensus around the need for deterrence approaches that reward responsible behaviors and improve defensive security, there was some division among speakers, as well as those attending the session, about the benefits of deterrence by punishment. Examples included sanctions against individual actors, as well as a range of credible threats of offensive actions to be taken online and off in response to discourage violations. Some worried that this model could drive an arms race and proliferation of capabilities, while others emphasized that rules do need to enforced to dissuade malicious actors.

3. Key Takeaways
  • The escalation of conflict in cyberspace in recent years is untenable and threatens to undermine security as it becomes more prevalent. Addressing this trend requires new thinking around the traditional tools of statecraft to make them applicable in a domain that is shared simultaneously by all stakeholder groups. This includes in the application of deterrence theory in cyberspace.
  • Deterrence in cyberspace, like all domains, seeks to dissuade malicious actions by making it more difficult or more costly for actors to pursue them. This means hardening security to make cyberattacks more challenging to conduct, recognizing and rewarding responsible behavior, and imposing meaningful consequences in response to cyberattacks.
  • Unlike earlier deterrence models, including the Mutually Assured Destruction of nuclear security, the number of actors and the proliferation of capabilities in cyberspace requires a much more dynamic approach that includes a wider range of response options and rewards for responsible behaviors.
  • Successful deterrence requires clear international norms and expectations. Governments should therefore be more engaged in establishing, strengthening and reinforcing rules of the road in cyberspace across different forums which include multistakeholder perspectives.
  • Deterrence by denial in cyberspace necessitates improved security across the board, especially for critical infrastructure, and therefore a whole-of-society approach to cybersecurity. This requires close coordination with the technology industry to make sure products are being developed and maintained securely and can be further supported by governments adopting and sharing their policies on vulnerability handling.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Douzet Douzet, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Joanna Świątkowska, Private Sector, Eastern European Group
Speaker 3: Katherine Fox, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Elonnai Hickok, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 5: Chris Inglis, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

There was no direct discussion of gender during the session

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #346 A Recipe for Deterrence in Cyberspace
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #350 Attributing attacks: political, technical & legal dimensions

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:43
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the different objectives and approaches to political, legal and technical attributions of cyber attacks?, How can different stakeholder groups work together more effectively to improve the attribution of cyber incidents?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There was broad consensus around the multi-dimensional nature of attribution, which can have a different meaning and different objective across different communities. Communities focused on a technical attribution may be more focused on how an attack has been carried out, and from where. Meanwhile, from a legal standpoint there is obviously much more interest in knowing who the individuals were behind an attack, and political attributions would be focused on understanding whether there was an organization or state-sponsor for a particular action. All of these different types of attribution require different and overlapping types of data from various sources. What is increasingly clear is that there needs to be greater cooperation across stakeholder groups, who have access to these different forms of data, to support more robust and reliable attributions to support a rules-based order in cyberspace.

Given that attribution efforts can be resource-intensive, there is concern that the scope of cyber incidents that wind up being attributed is too narrow, and often does not capture the growing numbers of attacks which target civil society groups, journalists, political dissidents, or other vulnerable populations, resulting in limited awareness or accountability. However, with limited resources, all actors need to be judicious and intentional about where it elects to focus its attribution efforts. While there was general agreement that it would help if attributions were made with greater transparency and clarity around how an attack occurred and which laws were violated, several factors – including protecting sensitive information and the rights of the accused – are frequently limiting factors. One area needing further discussion is whether there would be value in having an independent international body, or a consortium of organizations from around the world, responsible for conducting or verifying attribution to increase confidence in the claims.

3. Key Takeaways
  • Trust and confidence in attribution claims is essential for them to be impactful, which may require greater transparency from those making the claims.
  • While governments tend to attribute high-profile attacks and those which threaten essential values and principles, and industry does so on behalf of their customers, vulnerable groups – including political dissidents, journalists and others in civil society – rarely receive this kind of attention despite escalating numbers of attacks against them.
  • Attribution relies on the existence of clear rules and expectations for responsible behavior online.
  • The success of an attribution efforts, especially in calling out bad actors, is often largely based on a balance between speed and robustness. A quick attribution is helpful in responding promptly to a recent incident that is still in the public consciousness, but is undermined if it is not properly substantiated or supported by other actors.
  • Escalating political divides, both within and between nations, as well as increasing amounts of disinformation, have the potential to undermine confidence and trust of attribution claims.  
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Johanna Weaver, Government, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: John Scott-Railton, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: Camille François, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Serge Droz, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 5: Jens Monrad, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender was not featured prominently in the discussion

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #350 Attributing attacks: political, technical & legal dimensions
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #352 Digital Human Rights: Digital integrity of the human person

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:40
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
The inclusion of Digital integrity of a human person as a new human right: The person's digital profile can be seen as an extension of their body, and just as the physical body, this digital extension should be protected against mutilation, misuse and theft, The right to digital integrity, when guaranteed in Constitution or other human rights legislation, will create an unopposable right for individuals to request that internet governance is always conceived and executed with respect to each individuals' integrity., Assurance of (self) digital integrity will enhance trust in Governmental Institutions, Platforms, and organizations processing data.
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The areas of broad support and agreement were:

  • There is a need for quality protection of Humans from digital technology misuses.
  • The protection must take the risk of fragmentation of the internet into account.
  • Aspects of a person's identity and it's digital identity are not separate from the "real world".
  • Recognizing the digital integrity as an extension of bodily and mental integrity enable a novel vision on the protection of individuals.

Areas of no agreement/areas needing further discussion and development:

  • Some might view the extension of such rights within Human Rights within the context of criticism of the biased nature of a Human Rights approach.
  • This vision where personal data are constituting elements of the individual is contradicting regional approaches where personal data is considered as a commodity, or where personal data is considered as a common good to be managed by the authorities.
  • Some fear it could lead to stricter regulation of internet businesses.
3. Key Takeaways
  • there is a high interest in this topic
  • the common understanding that stakes are high for the society
  • understanding that this approach is confronting some business models based on personal data monetization.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Organizer 1: Gregory Engels, Pirate Parties International
Organizer 2: Bailey Lamon, Pirate Parties International

Speaker 1: Alexis Roussel, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: Alexander Isavnin, Technical Community, Eastern European Group
Speaker 3: Bailey Lamon, Pirate Parties International (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender Identity also reflects in the digital - and if someone decides to change their gender at some point, that change also reflects in the online world - and doing so should be in the sole control of that person. Lack of protection of Digital Integrity will certainly lead to serious problems and consequences, not only in the digital but also in the physical world.  

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #352 Digital Human Rights: Digital integrity of the human person
10. Voluntary Commitment

All panelists pledged to continue to work to forward the goals of the Internet Governance Forum and the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation, in particular towards the Digital Human Rights, ensuring the protection of human rights in the digital era.

IGF 2020 WS #353 Hacking-Back: A Dialogue with Industry

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 09:35
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What are the dangers of permitting private industry to hack back to protect themselves and their customers?, What types of activities should be considered hack backs versus active defense measures that should be protected?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

All of the speakers, representing different technology companies and signatories of the Cybersecurity Tech Accord, and seemingly also the majority of attendees, agreed with Paris Call principle #8 – that private industry should not be permitted to “hack back” against attackers for their own purposes. In addition, speakers agreed on a general definition of what types of activities should be considered “hack backs” – namely, the unlawful access to computer systems outside ones own networks in order to retaliate against bad actors.

Consensus that such activities were ill-advised was based on concerns about their legality, as well as the potential for unintended consequences and escalation of attacks with malicious actors, even nation state actors. The discussion also highlighted the dangers of a growing market of “hackers for hire” and those selling offensive tools to be used by states and other actors, with questionable legality.

While there was much consensus about definitions and what types of actions should be permitted, representatives from respective companies had differing standards when it came to the types of active defense measures they would pursue – including things like botnet takedowns.

3. Key Takeaways

The discussion went a long way in highlighting how industry understands its roles and responsibilities to promote security in cyberspace while not conducting “hack back” activities. For policymakers, a major takeaway should be a shared understanding that hack backs are activities that involve the illegal access to protected systems in order to retaliate against or steal back from an attacker. Policies should not seek to permit such activities, as they would promote vigilantism and greater instability in cyberspace. At the same time, policies should be careful not to prohibit necessary active defense measures that companies increasingly employ to keep themselves and their customers safe. Discussions of how to craft such policies should always seek to include the perspectives of the technology industry.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Seth Cutler, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Kaja Ciglic, Private Sector, Eastern European Group
Speaker 3: Ed Cabrera, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 4: Alissa Starzak, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 5: Justin Vaisse, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

There was no particular discussion of gender issues in the workshop

8. Session Outputs:

Cybersecurity Tech Accord's whitepaper on hack back, released in advance of the workshop:

https://cybertechaccord.org/uploads/prod/2020/11/hack-back-update-13112…;

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #353 Hacking-Back: A Dialogue with Industry
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #43 Trusted Digital Space via PRIDA–Informed Transformed Africa

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:27
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
2. Summary of Issues Discussed
3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:
8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #53 Right to Play?---Online Gaming and Child Rights

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:32
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. What is the impact of online gaming in the exercises of rights of the child? Whether online games have a positive or negative influence on children and their development?, 2. What are the roles of the industry, public authorities, parents, caregivers and children themselves in regulating access, behaviors and contents for healthy play in online games? How can they cooperate with each other?, 4. How to empower children as active right holders in online gaming? Why is it essential to involve the perspective of children and their rights in online gaming?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Online gaming poses both opportunities and challenges to children's development. The panelists examined the impact from different aspects. Professor Pete Etchells gave a brief overview of gaming addiction. He challenged the WHO classification by arguing that maybe cause over-diagnosis and stigma.

Professor Manisha Shelat introduced how to empower child in online gaming by media literacy. She recommended to develop a game literacy, upgraded from media literacy, to cultivate children’s capability to learning in games, learning by game design, learning about and from games.

Dr. Jing Sun went through some facts of child online gaming in China, including the internet coverage, internet participation, motivation and time length, etc.. She shared the study results from Mizuko Ito, children’s purpose for gaming basically covers killing time, hanging out, recreational gaming, organizing and mobilizing, and augmented game play.

Lanky Zheng put forward his opinion about the Relationship between Video Games and Teenagers’ Development, with Tencent’s practices. He introduced that Tencent has endeavored to“use game-based interaction to guide teenagers' learning, and protecting children's right to play in the digital era

Child representative, Bai Yufan, shared her own experience on gaming. She enjoyed playing gaming while socializing with friends, and she hoped that gaming companies will work for more creative games in the future.

Professor Amanda is an internationally renowned expert in child-centred, participatory research. She hit the workshop topic by listing the rights that have been impacted by online gamingThen she explained the benefits to children’s literacy, numeracy, critical thinking, and enjoyment, and in the meantime, risks could be posed by online play.

The attended panelists have agreed on that the comprehensive governance in online gaming calls for the joint efforts from parents and educators, gaming industry, academia, policy makers, and children themselves.

 

3. Key Takeaways

We are highlighting a child rights perspective, because children have the right to learn, to play, to be protected from harm, and to reach their potential in today’s digital environment which includes connected gaming.

Gaming addiction is real and we should be worried, but not panic. And there is still so much more we need to learn about this issue. Academic community especially behavioral science and mental health need to produce more solid evidence, and communicate them effectively so they could guide the policy making and industry practices.  

Gaming literacy, developed from media literacy and digital literacy, enables children to mitigate the risks and empower themselves in online play.  

Child participation is of high value, we shouldn’t make decisions about children without them. Parents, educators, the industry, and policy makers should really make it a standard practice to consult children on matters which will have impact on their lives.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Pete Etchells, Manisha Shelat,  Lanky Zheng, Jing Sun, Yufan Bai, Amanda Third 

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Manisha mentioned the gender gap is narrowing. 88% of women think online games are the best way to relax. Compared with 45% of men, 61% of women are willing to skip eating, sleeping and other activities for online games. This shows that the gap between male and female players has decreased.

 

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #53 Right to Play?---Online Gaming and Child Rights
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #59 Everything you wanted to ask about Hate Speech but didn't

Updated: Wed, 21/07/2021 - 13:07
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Have the policy and practice initiatives of past years helped address the risks hate speech online poses
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The approach taken to address hate speech need to be sensitive to the type of hate speech and its context. In line with UN Rabat plan of action there is agreement Hate Speech can fall in one of three categories:

  • Hate Speech that is illegal in line with international standards
  • “Hate speech” that is not illegal but harmful to specific groups and individuals based on protected characteristics.
  • “Hate speech” that is not harmful to a specific group but undesirable in a democratic society

The Council of Europe therefore promotes a comprehensive approach to combating Hate Speech, including in the online environment.

1. Preventive measures:

Education of all members of society & media literacy in the digital environment is key; Use of Counter narratives important, but our discourse needs to be made more accessible for the common people in the daily life. Challenge because the polarization of everything: the counter-narratives, social justice vs. the “more normal people”; People migrate to marginalized smaller platforms limiting their exposure to different points of view to avoid radicalization

2. Self- and Co-regulatory to content moderation: 

Regulation must differentiate between legal, illegal, and harmful speech. Mere deletion without prosecution is a problem. National task force against hate speech (involving social networks, internet associations and CSOs), and regulation has improves content moderation practice, but has its limitations.

3. Implementation of national criminal and admin legislation covering Hate Speech online:

Internet Service Providers cooperation with law Enforcement is essential for both sides but requires clear rules and clarity on how they should be applied. But regional or even world wide streamlining of regulations and definitions is needed.

3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Martin Mlynár Youth Member No hate Speech Network

Albin Dearing, EU Fundamental Rights Agency

Sejal Parmer,  Lecturer, School of Law, University of Sheffield

Alexander Schafer, Head of division for consumer policy in the information society,telecommunications and media law - Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection 

Bastiaan Winkel, Coordinating Policy Adviser, Law Enforcement and Combatting Crime, Ministry of Justice and Security of The Netherlands & vice chair of the Committee of Expert of Combating Hate Speech of the Council of Europe

Alexandra Laffitte, Vice Chair of EuroISPA

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Sexist hate speech is a major concern and persistent aspect of hate speech. It often intersects with other protected characteristics. 

The session maintained a balance regarding gender in line up of speakers, and ensured participation of a youth delegate from the No Hate Speech Movement/ network. Young persons and both men and women spoke during the breakout groups. 

8. Session Outputs:

No Hate Speech Network, independent network established by national campaigns and activist of the No Hate Speech Movement youth campaign of the Council of Europe: https://www.facebook.com/nohatespeechnetwork/

Initiative: ‘I Am Here’: https://www.facebook.com/iamhere.intl

Digital Opportunities Foundation Germany: https://www.intgovforum.org/content/igf-2020-village-booth-26-stiftung-digitale-chancen

9. Group Photo
WS#59 All you wanted to ask about Hate Speech, but didn't yet.
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #71 Building trust through responsible response to global crises

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:35
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Ensuring sufficient bandwidth through each leg of the communications network, Importance of maintaining the security and resiliency of these networks, Expanding connectivity to increase availability to meet demand, especially to vulnerable populations
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The COVID-19 crisis put into stark relief the importance of developing a new framework that would safeguard user trust in the soundness of the communications network backbone and the reliability of Internet connectivity. Such challenges included: (1) ensuring sufficient bandwidth through each leg of the network; (2) maintaining the security and resiliency of these networks; (3) expanding connectivity to increase availability to meet demand, especially to vulnerable populations; and (4) establishing meaningful global communication channels. The workshop addressed how ensuring the soundness of communications networks was essential for dissemination of information for the prevention and mitigation of COVID-19.   This represented stakeholder collaboration in action.

3. Key Takeaways
  1. COVID-19 has driven increased global demand by citizens for a connectivity and services that require a secure and reliable Internet.
  2. Protecting and fortifying infrastructure and systems so that users and nations will trust that the Internet can be leveraged to reliably and securely mitigate a global crisis and be a trusted means to support work from home, distance learning, tele-health and to disseminate useful and relevant information.
  3. Business, government, the technical community, multilateral organizations, and others needed to work together through collaboration and cooperation amid constantly changing conditions to address the challenges presented by national crises, including COVID-19.
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Kathryn Condello, Lumen, female

Toshiya Jitsuzumi, Professor in the Faculty of Policy Studies, Chuo University, male

Doreen Bogdan-Martin, ITU Telecommunication Development Bureau, female

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Approximately 38 participants were women of the 81 who registered. The panel itself was gender balanced, with two out of three. The session did not directly address issues related to gender equality and/or women’s empowerment. However, it did recognize that the gender gap is a significant factor underlying the connectivity gap in Least Developed Countries such as Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia.

8. Session Outputs:

Policy Recommendations of Suggestions for the Way Forward

  1. Digital transformation within the government sector is critical to ensuring citizen access to important information during times of crisis.
  2. Bridging the divide through expanded broadband connectivity is a prerequisite to fully leveraging the digital economy.
  3. Strengthening cybersecurity readiness for workforces that move to a work from home environment is critical to ensuring the security and resiliency of critical infrastructure and to supporting an ever-expanding digital economy.
  4. Disaster response strategies should ensure coordination and alignment across all levels of government – Federal, state, local, tribal and territorial partners is important for developing a cohesive, meaning response to national disasters, even when infrastructure isn’t impacted such was the case with the COVID-19 crisis.

In addition to ITU, see Fall meeting of UN Broadband Commission -- https://broadbandcommission.org/events/Pages/AnnualMeeting2020.aspx

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

Speakers will submit their voluntary commitments to the IGF via the link provided.

Overall, they pledged to fostered greater collaboration between business and government in providing a secure, stable, and resilient global communications infrastructure aimed at deepening the trust of global citizens in their capacity to communicate and participate in the digital economy.,

 

IGF 2020 WS #72 Tech for the Planet

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:17
Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
1. How can existing and emerging digital technologies contribute to addressing climate change and how can they foster change in various sectors of the economy (manufacturing, trade, agrifood, etc.)? What initiatives exist and what can be done to improve them? , 2. What role can data and AI play in tackling sustainability issues such as climate change, biodiversity, conservation and water scarcity? , 3. How could policy-making benefit from the analysis of big data to better understand impacts of policy decisions on sustainability?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Discussion about a multistakeholder approach to saving the planet

The speakers discussed how multistakeholder collaboration could help in developing meaningful solutions to address environmental challenges. It was agreed that both governmental and corporate standards are needed and can complement each other. Matt Peterson explained that Amazon is trying to pioneer corporate standards by bringing together different corporations to commit to the same goals.

With regard to the work of Oceanmind, Nick Wise stated that multistakeholder collaboration is needed to protect the ocean. Governments play an important role as they set and agree on regulations and international treaties and are responsible for enforcing shipping rules. Local NGOs are essential for engaging governments and in understanding the local culture and concerns and complexities. All parties are needed to come together to achieve impact.

The moderator Jorge Cancio (Swiss Government) closed with stating that multistakeholder collaboration is a minimum requirement to address environmental issues. Furthermore, the intersessional work within the IGF on environment and digitalisation should and will further evolve.

3. Key Takeaways

To make progress on environmental issues, we need data. New technologies – including satellites, drones, IoT powered sensors etc. – have vastly accelerated data collection.

Currently, we see an overabundance – and not a lack – of date. There is a need for platforms and AI to house, understand, analyse and aggregate this data. Moreover, Interoperability of data is important. 

There are many great examples by companies and NGOs on how to use technology to help addressing the planet’s environmental challenges (among others Amazon’s “Climate Pledge Fund”, Mastercard’s “Priceless Planet Coalition” and the work of Oceanmind).

Standards are important to tackle climate change and e-waste.

The digital divide poses a challenge: People need to be connected, but in a sustainable way.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers
  • Matt Peterson, Director of Amazon's Climate Pledge Fund;
  • Caroline Louveaux, Executive Vice President of Privacy at Mastercard;
  • Nick Wise, Nick Wise is founder and CEO of OceanMind; and
  • Paolo Gemma, senior Specialist and representative of Huawei 
7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

At least half of the workshop participants were women, who actively contributed to the Chat. The panel itself  was balanced to include a woman speaker (Caroline Louveaux, Mastercard), woman online moderator (Barbara Wanner, U.S. Council for International Business), and woman substantive rapportuer (Livia Walpen, Govt of Switzerland). 

The session did not directly address issues related to gender equality and/or women’s empowerment.

8. Session Outputs:

To make progress on environmental issues, we need data. New technologies – including satellites, drones, IoT powered sensors etc. – have vastly accelerated data collection.

Currently, we see an overabundance – and not a lack – of date. There is a need for platforms and AI to house, understand, analyse and aggregate this data. Moreover, Interoperability of data is important. 

There are many great examples by companies and NGOs on how to use technology to help addressing the planet’s environmental challenges (among others Amazon’s “Climate Pledge Fund”, Mastercard’s “Priceless Planet Coalition” and the work of Oceanmind).

Standards are important to tackle climate change and e-waste.

The digital divide poses a challenge: People need to be connected, but in a sustainable way.

9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

Overall, speakers pledged to take forward to IGF goals and objective by providing inputs to the online submission portal. In addition:

Paola Gemma (Huawei) pledged to continue working in the ITU-T Study Group 5 (focuse on the environment) to " write something to help the young generation to have a better world.  Sometimes we cannot change the past but we can build the future."

Caroline Louveaux (Mastercard) pledge to continue  is to promote trust, security and human rights in the digital era, including for the global collaboration that is needed, we have been discussing today, in the context of artificial intelligence, data and technology. This foundation of trust will enable the use of technologies to address environmental challenges.

Nick Wise (Oceanmind) pledged to remain ommitted to improving the health of the ocean using technology.

Matt Peterson (Amazon) noted the IGF's important work and expressed a  commitment to continue to provide updates to the IGF community of what Climate Pledge Fund's supported companies are building to improve the environment.

IGF 2020 WS #75 AI solution and governance for global public emergencies

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:10
Emerging Regulation: Market Structure, Content, Data And Consumer Rights and Protection
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What societal and economic benefits are enabled by the trustworthy use of AI in global public emergencies? , How should these benefits be weighed against the need to protect fundamental rights?, What are the key challenges and possible solutions for AI and Big Data governance?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

There was broad support for the view that AI and Big Data can provide innovations and opportunities in epidemic preparedness and response. Good application cases were introduced during the presentations. Panellists also agreed that although AI system and Big Data played a key role in combating COVID-19, they inevitably created some new problems. Especially, challenges of AI and Big Data Governance are well identified. Therefore, panellists reached a consensus on the great significance of mapping some good governance models of AI and Big Data to maximize their benefits. Moreover, they agreed that a synergy of global partnership is required on AI, both for its technical development and for its governance. Further discussions are needed on the detailed description for implementation at the operational level.

3. Key Takeaways

This session reached a consensus on the necessity of establishing AI policy and good governance models, as well as improving data management and operational standard to make better use of AI. The key takeaways are as follow:

1. Present key issues and challenges on AI and Big Data governance for global public emergencies.

2. Reach common understanding on the ways in which AI can be put to work to maximize its benefits.

3. Define a follow-up action plan and come out an AI governance principles and guidelines.

 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: KE GONG, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization

Speaker 2: Horst Kremers, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)

Speaker 3: Chuang Liu, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group

Speaker 4: Daisy Selematsela, Civil Society, African Group

Speaker 5: Ricardo Israel Robles Pelayo, Private Sector, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

Speaker 6: Xiang Zhou, China Association for Science and Technology (CAST)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

The discussion at this session concerns every stakeholder involved in the field of AI and Big Data, including citizens, scientists, policy makers, public and private sectors, civil society organizations, academia and research institutions and so forth. It did not directly address issues related to gender equality and/or women’s empowerment. Recommendations were put forward on how to establish effective AI policy and good governance models, as well as how to improve data management, which should be applied to people in general, regardless of their gender.

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #75 AI solution and governance for global public emergencies
10. Voluntary Commitment
IGF 2020 WS #81 Overcoming the US-China digital Cold War

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 13:38
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
Conflict between US and China on Internet governance models, cyber-sovereignty, Global trade in information services and telecom equipment , China's approach to data governance and data control
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Internet freedom. Are China/US actions threatening the open and free internet? There was no agreement on this from representatives of China and the USA. But civil society, academic and industry participants indicated that both governments are doing things that restrict and divide internet connectivity. As one panelist said, “In principle, [if] we disagree with the great firewall of China, we should probably also disagree with the clean networks as well.”

Fragmentation and sovereignty The US representative said the Clean Networks initiative was necessary to maintain trust. China's representatives defended the concept of cyber-sovereignty but also claimed that the US is trying to achieve sovereignty as well. The European suggested that while China and the US fight, Europe may be able to "take the cake" by developing a "third way," but the nature of this alternative was not well specified.

Competing models of IG. In Africa, China's government is not using telecom infrastructure to impose its internet governance model on foreign markets, but its commercial vendors sometimes use China's reputation for surveillance and control to sell their products. The US claims China is a threat to the multistakeholder model, but China says it has expressed support for it many times and participate in ICANN.

Hong Kong National Security Law. creates extraordinary powers and was criticized as shutting down free speech in HK, but has not been used to harass western platforms yet.

New IP proposal was criticized by the US as “an attack on the very foundations of the Internet” but this was revealed as an overstatement as it is not really a protocol yet

China’s “Global Initiative on Data Security” was presented but criticized as too territorial and sovereignty-based.

The Chip war (US export controls) was discussed as punitive rather than supporting cybersecurity or creating trade leverage

3. Key Takeaways

Although the fundamental policy differences underlying the US-China division were not overcome, there was near-consensus on one critical point: centrality of global internet users.

Most panelists agreed that the well-being of internet users globally, not nation-states, should be the starting point of the debate. Mr Mok of Hong Kong put it well: "I do still wish as a user all this censorship and surveillance would go away by everybody. It hurts me as a user to see the powers of both sides pointing fingers at each other and saying I am better than you are." Rather than speaking of national sovereignty, we should speak of "user, people's sovereignty." As one panelist said, "things will happen from the users upwards rather than imposing restriction or standards of one country or the other." We think this is one of the most important ideas that high-level policy makers need to know about. 

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

All speakers in the original proposal were present and participated:
Milton Mueller (Georgia Institute of Technology) and Peixi Xu (Communication University of China), moderators and organizers

Stephen Anderson, US State Department, USA

Guo Feng, Ministry of Information Technology, PRC

Iginio Gagliardone, WITS University, South Africa

Jyoti Panday, Internet Governance Project, India

Joanna Kulesza, University of Lodz, Poland

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were not discussed. 

9. Group Photo
Overcoming the US China Digital Cold War
10. Voluntary Commitment

Professor Milton Mueller committed to hold educational sessions on multi-stakeholder governance directed towards a Chinese audience.

Professor Joanna Kulesza committed to advance the end user-focused sovereignty concept within ICANN on behalf of the end user community.

Professor Peixi Xu committed to promote digital interdependence through the UN 

IGF 2020 WS #92 Setting Children's Rights in the Internet Governance Agenda

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 12:03
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
How to balance risks and opportunities online for children taking into consideration different sociocultural contexts?, How can children’s rights to participation, access to information, and freedom of speech be preserved and balanced with their right to be protected from violence, hate speech, exploitation and sexual abuse in the online environment? , How different stakeholders, including children themselves, perceive the balance between risks and opportunities?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

Although roughly 1/3 of all Internet users are under 18 (according to UNICEF), most regulatory instruments for promoting human rights and data protection do not present specific recommendations aimed at this group.  There is no consensus on how to balance protection from on line abuse without restricting opportunities made available by digital inclusion such as access to information and freedom of expression.

Children's rights do apply online as offline, even though the digital environment is profoundly reconfiguring the expression of rights, the array of rights and rights infringements thar children experience.There is a challenge on how to operationalize online children´s rights, as stated by the Convention of the Rights of the child, which was crafted before the Internet.

There is broad consesus on the need for including sound evidence from research to support the implementation of those policies and to protect children's rights globally and at the national level, with a focus on including children´s own voices.   

3. Key Takeaways
4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Sonia Livingstone, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Guilherme Canela Godoi , Intergovernmental Organization, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 3: Amanda Third, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 4: Maria Alejandra Trossero, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 5: Patricio Cabello, Government, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

Gender issues were discussed as part of the differentiated challenges facing boys and girls in their digital lives, and the need to address them in the programs and policies aimed at setting their rights. 

8. Session Outputs:
9. Group Photo
10. Voluntary Commitment

The speakers did not express their voluntary commitments during the event; they were offered the link to do so. 

IGF 2020 WS #97 Fact-Checking: A Realm for Multi-stakeholder model?

Updated: Fri, 17/12/2021 - 11:59
Trust, Security, Stability
1. Key Policy Questions and related issues
What stakeholders are responsible for checking the credibility of fact-checkers and how can their reliability be ensured?, Is it possible to borrow or to expand on existing models such as the multi-stakeholder model in order to improve the fact-checking process?, What are the key concepts for establishing trust and how can they be implemented in fact-checking?
2. Summary of Issues Discussed

The panellists outlined several key issues fact-checkers and fact-checking initiatives face globally. Among the factors named were speed, experience, language skills, political pressure, financial burdens, legal threats, a public lack of media literacy education, lack of trust in journalism and a lack of transparency from social media companies, especially regarding algorithms.

Several further questions were raised and discussed by the panel. They included:

  • Which stakeholder(s) should be responsible for promoting education regarding media literacy and misinformation? Is there any useful framework to educate internet users about fact-checking?
  • How can the lack of funding for fact-checkers and fact-checking organisations be addressed?
  • How important is the international level for fact-checking in comparison to the national level? Is international cooperation in fact-checking achievable in ten years or 20 years?
  • Which role does the cyber-security community take in combating misinformation?
  • How can stakeholders that support or spread misinformation be included in a potential multi-stakeholder fact-checking process without affecting its integrity as a whole?

Further and more specific questions were addressed by the respective panellists both in parallel to the session using the Q&A chat window and live at the end of the workshop.

3. Key Takeaways

There are several central takeaways from the workshop and the discussion, especially regarding the methods and stakeholders involved in fact-checking.

It was established that both questions of stakeholder integration in the fact-checking process and of financing highly depend on the nature of the political system at hand. The success of fact-checking is dependent on users’ trust in the fact-checkers and institutions, which can be both amplified and damaged by government involvement in the process. This complicates questions of how to finance fact-checking in a way that both relieves the burden carried by fact-checking organisations themselves and does not damage their credibility.

Furthermore, it was proposed that education is the most central factor in combating misinformation, improving media literacy and increasing the quality of information spread online. It could also advance the objective of re-rooting public dialogue in facts and science and re-establishing the concept of truth. In this context, it was also suggested that additional work is needed to restore trust in journalism. However, how stakeholders who benefit from spreading false information can be included in and addressed by this process remains a difficult question.

Lastly, it was suggested that international cooperation in fact-checking will be of increasing importance in the future, despite the core work being on the local level.

4. Policy Recommendations or Suggestions for the Way Forward
5. Other Initiatives Addressing the Session Issues
6. Final Speakers

Speaker 1: Charles Mok, Government, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 2: Alice Echtermann, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 3: Jens Kaessner, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG) 
Speaker 4: BIRARDA CARINA, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 5: Obed Sindy, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)

7. Reflection to Gender Issues:

A discussion of the relationship between gender issues and misinformation exceeded the scope of this workshop, though it is highly recommended that it should be considered as a topic for future panels.

8. Session Outputs:

In addition to this report, the speakers’ slides (if applicable) were gathered by the organisers.

Here is a link to the more detailed report of the workshop: 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K2WscbbnePEaz4OEO-dHKljkdRwyo1jF/view?…

9. Group Photo
IGF 2020 WS #97 Fact-Checking: A Realm for Multi-stakeholder model
10. Voluntary Commitment

The final discussion called for a general commitment of Internet users to exercise caution and reason when encountering information online.